From: jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com 
  
 On Mon, 08 Sep 2025 12:50:39 +0100, GB wrote: 
  
 > On 08/09/2025 12:42, Roland Perry wrote: 
 >> In message <109mbh2$3qh8d$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:35:14 on Mon, 8 Sep 
 >> 2025, Jethro_uk  remarked: 
 >>> On Mon, 08 Sep 2025 10:59:57 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>>> In message <109m84c$6u3c$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:37:15 on Mon, 8 Sep 
 >>>> 2025, 
 >>>> GB  remarked: 
 >>>>> [quoted text muted] 
 >>>> 
 >>>> Near where I live is a green-field site with planning permission for 
 >>>> five or six detached homes. Two previous developers have thrown in 
 >>>> the towel, not having got beyond the foundations (but no roads). At 
 >>>> the latest asking price for the land, nobody could build a house and 
 >>>> make any profit at all. 
 >>>> So nobody is. 
 >>> 
 >>> Permission should have an expiry date, and come with a penalty for not 
 >>> being executed. 
 >> 
 >> The permission does expire, but it's trivially easy to renew just 
 >> before. 
 > 
 > I'm sure that any developers here can confirm, but my understanding is 
 > that the work only has to start within the time limits. You say that 
 > foundations have been laid, so that's enough to secure the planning 
 > permission. 
  
 Just change the rules. It's the one thing government is meant to do. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)