Latest news with #illegalconstruction
RNZ News
09-07-2025
- RNZ News
Church's $100k fine shows importance of due diligence for Pacific communities, leaders say
Photo: Auckland Council A six-figure fine imposed on a Māngere church for illegal construction should serve as a reminder to all Pacific churches of the importance of conducting necessary checks before starting any project, community leaders say. They emphasise the need for other Pacific congregations to ask questions, verify credentials, and seek proper advice to safeguard the contributions of their members. Their comments follow the Auckland District Court's ruling that the Sāmoan Congregational Christian Church of New Zealand Māngere Trust and its representative, Sean Palala, were guilty of 15 breaches of the Building Act and Resource Management Act due to unlawful construction and use of a church and community centre on McKenzie Road in Māngere. The Trust was fined more than $80,000 and ordered to pay an additional $25,300 to Auckland Council for costs. Palala also received a $7000 fine and was sentenced to 400 hours of community service. The court heard that the church continued to use the building for gatherings despite receiving notices of its hazardous condition and orders to stop using the complex. Pacific community leader Alf Filipaina says the church trust paid the price because it relied on someone who claimed to understand council processes but was uninformed about them. The Manukau ward councillor says other churches can avoid making the same mistake by consulting with other congregations, verifying credentials and asking the right questions. "They ended up contracting someone who indicated he knew the processes for building and resource consents, and he did not," he said. "Having that talanoa first is so important. Talk to other churches. Who did you use? How did you do it? Always double check, triple check.". The Māngere church boarded up after the Auckland District Court ruling, highlighting the consequences of ignoring stop-use orders. Photo: Auckland Council Filipaina cites two recent projects as examples of how Pacific churches can successfully navigate these processes when they engage with the right people. He says the Sāmoan Consulate complex, Maota Fale o Sāmoa, and the new LDS (Mormon) temple in Manukau both succeeded because they used certified planners who guided them throughout every step of the process. He adds that investing in professional help upfront is more cost-effective than facing hefty fines later. Filipaina recently spent over $5300 on a building consent for renovations to his own home. "When you have someone who truly knows the process -resource consents, building consents, inspections - it goes smoothly. That is the difference. "That is money upfront, but that is nothing compared to the $100,000 they are paying now. Sometimes paying early saves your people later." Apulu Reece Autagavaia, chair of the Ōtara Papatoetoe Local Board, says many small churches mistakenly believe they can handle complex consent processes on their own, but it is wiser to hire professionals to assist with these procedures. He suggests that Pacific families engage younger generations, who are more adept at navigating the system, and use community or business networks to find trustworthy assistance. "I encourage our communities to do the due diligence and get the experts in to provide professional advice. It might cost a bit, but it is worth it because then you have safeguards when things do go wrong. "There are plenty of churches out there starting out. Do it the right way, get professional advice. If you do not know where to start, Pacific business organisations can help, or even your bank," Apulu said. Tauanu'u Nick Bakulich, chair of the Māngere Ōtāhuhu Local Board, says good intentions are not enough when families contribute money in good faith. "This situation shows how important it is to involve experts in building projects who can give qualified advice on regulatory matters," he said. The Māngere property has since been sold, meaning the building is no longer owned by the church. Filipaina says this makes the lesson even clearer for other congregations. "Our people gave to build that church. Now it is gone and they are paying fines on top of that. That is why you check first and do it the right way, so you do not lose what you worked so hard for." An earlier image showing the church under construction on McKenzie Road, Māngere - a project that proceeded without proper building consents. Photo: Auckland Council Auckland Council's David Pawson says ignoring court orders and using unsafe buildings would not be tolerated. "Compliance with building and resource consent laws is essential for the safety of our communities," Pawson said. Filipaina says the key takeaway is protecting the sacrifices of church members who contribute with goodwill and expect an orderly process. "Our people give with their hearts. They deserve to know their sacrifice will not be wasted. We have seen it work when it is done right. Do the checks, protect what you build and protect your people." Pacific leaders advise that any church planning a new building or renovation should consult with other churches that have successfully navigated the process. Filipaina stresses the importance of hiring a qualified planner or consent expert and thoroughly verifying their credentials carefully. "It's money well spent." Other recommendations include budgeting for proper compliance costs upfront and requesting a pre-application meeting with the council to address any uncertainties. ' Use trusted Pacific business networks for support. The Sāmoan Congregational Christian Church of New Zealand Māngere Trust and Sean Palala could not be reached for comment. LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
Daily Mail
05-07-2025
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE 'Devastated' couple who spent £45k inheritance on building illegal log cabin in national park say they were 'led in blind' after council orders them to demolish it
A couple who cleared out their retirement savings to build an illegal off-grid cabin in one of Britain's most protected national parks say they are 'devastated' after planners ordered they knock it down. Andrew and Debbie Melbourne insist they knew 'nothing' and were 'led in blind' about planning laws preventing the construction of their 1,200 sq ft fully insulated spruce cabin which boasts stunning views over the South Downs. Following a complex planning investigation and abject fury from neighbours, the couple were pursued through the courts and now have two months to knock the vast single-storey structure down or face jail. Speaking to MailOnline at their now partially-dismantled cabin near Waterlooville, in Hampshire, Debbie broke down in tears as she said: 'It would have allowed us to foresee our dream. It was something for our boys and a legacy. 'Normal people like us don't know the laws of the land. At no point ever were we told about Article 4 restrictions or that this was in the national park.' Andrew, 56, a former music teacher, added: 'We were led in blind basically. It's absolutely devastating, we spent two years researching what we could and couldn't put on the land. 'There were no disclosures that we were on the South Downs National Park. If we'd known we wouldn't have bought it. Absolutely I regret it, I wouldn't have done it, I've lost all my inheritance through this. 'We've had loads of grief from the council, lies from the council. Half a dozen people up on the other side don't like what we're doing. I was a teacher in the area and they just want to discredit my name.' The couple purchased their half-acre plot on land off Lovedean Lane last year for around £20,000 before buying a German-made prefabricated log cabin online for £25,000. The site is one of over 80 individual plots on a controversial land banking scheme owned by Gladwish Land Sales, who once had their name emblazoned across a whopping 31 Non-League football teams and courted criticism in the early noughties through their fan-targeted matchday programme ads. The concept sees developers buy a field before dividing it into smaller parcels and selling those off to buyers who are often told they will get planning in the future which may not be granted. Andrew said he had never heard of land banking before and said he bought the land privately from the vendor. The dad-of-two, who plays the trombone in local Ska and Jazz bands, insists there were no disclosures on the plot being inside a National Park or it being subject to an Article 4, which removes permitted development rights which allow certain types of minor building works to take place. 'We had no idea we couldn't do anything on this land, we had no idea it was part of the South Downs National Park, the maps are quite ambiguous, they are not very clear,' Andrew added. A quick Google search of the South Downs National Park boundaries takes you to an interactive map titled 'Do I live in the National Park?', it shows the Melbournes' plot inside the boundary. Building began without planning permission in April last year and saw the couple level a vast area at the top of their plot where the cabin now sits. Andrew reckons they removed well over ten tons of mostly chalk soil. 'The whole idea was to start up a community garden, we wanted to put in the lodge so people could use it while working here,' Andrew claims. The cabin was up in five months and the couple say it would have been totally off-grid featuring a kitchen, office space, shower rooms, living quarters and a compostable toilet with its own on-site water supply. Despite the facilities to make the cabin habitable, the couple, who have lived in the area for 35 years, claim they had no intention of living in it. As the project progressed, trees were cut down and a garden which slopes down the hill towards a bridleway was created. Trees, shrubs and bushes were planted with the intention of creating a Japanese 'miyawaki forest' that would grow quickly into a miniature dense woodland. A road leading from an entrance gate up the side of the hill and to the cabin was also carved into the hillside without planning permission. It didn't take long before planners from East Hampshire District Council and the South Downs National Park Authority began issuing warnings and notices. Between September 2024 and February 2025 officers served a Planning Contravention Notice, two Enforcement Notices and a Stop Notice to the Melbournes. Despite multiple warnings, the couple 'ploughed on regardless', as one exasperated neighbour who looks out on to the 'eyesore' cabin, said. That neighbour, along with several others, had watched the 'upsetting' project unfold from their homes on Glamorgan Road, which overlooks the Melbournes cabin plot from an opposing hillside, and decided to take action. They added: 'We saw them clearing the site with a mini digger and thought, hang on? On the one hand they're claiming the land is for eco purposes and bee farming but then they're pulling down trees during nesting season. 'Every morning I make a cup of coffee, I look at that, I go to my office, I get up to get something, I look at that. I can't avoid it. 'They had a chance to engage in a process but they've just ploughed on regardless of the planning enforcement notices. Anyone in their right mind would have sought legal advice.' Another neighbour on the road said: 'The thing that galled us was that they were constantly ignoring the law, advice and notices they were issued. 'They could have gone to any one of the authorities for proper advice and they chose not to. 'Every time somebody spoke to them and tried to get to the bottom of what they were doing they seemed to change their story.' One lady who wished to remain anonymous alleged the couple had objected to people walking along the bridleway past the cabin. 'He's obviously tried to do that to stop people looking at what he's doing,' she claimed. Despite some objections, one local carpenter said he didn't think the cabin was that bad, noting: 'It blends into the landscape doesn't it? It's natural isn't it? But they didn't have planning, unfortunately.' The cabin was 80 per cent finished in May when the Melbournes, threatened with a High Court hearing in June, signed a legally binding contract agreeing to remove the building. As part of the agreement they were ordered to remove all materials, gates, fences and other forms of development, including the groundworks and paths they'd carved out of the landscape and return the site to its original condition. They were slapped with a £3,500 fine by East Hampshire District Council and told the cabin must be gone in 56 days or face a custodial sentence. The couple are in the process of dismantling the cabin and have already removed the roof and flooring. The Melbournes reckon they have lost well over £50,000 on the project and get emotional when asked about their next move. 'It was something for our boys and a legacy, it would've been great for our grandson,' says Debbie, as she wipes away tears after struggling to comprehend the situation. She added: 'We have got no savings left now, we invested in something we thought would be good for the community. It's been a complete nightmare. The plot is going on the market this week. 'We will recoup some money and maybe find another piece of land that's not in a national park.' Andrew added: 'We were going to retire but it's all gone sour.' Councillor Angela Glass, EHDC's Portfolio Holder for Planning and Enforcement, said: 'We are delighted this legal agreement has been signed and we now expect the development to be cleared over the next couple of months. 'This is the culmination of many months of complex legal and enforcement work by our determined team of officers to reach this position. 'I want residents to understand that if people breach planning rules, then we have the means to take action against them.' Councillor Sara Schillemore, the local ward councillor for Catherington, said: 'Residents were appalled to see this unsightly structure being erected in one of the most picturesque and valuable viewpoints in East Hampshire. 'It's vitally important that we protect our precious landscape and residents will be thrilled to see the development removed. East Hampshire Enforcement Officers worked hard for many months to achieve this result, and I sincerely thank them.' Tim Slaney, Director of Planning at the South Downs National Park Authority, said: 'I'm delighted we've reached a resolution to this breach of planning that was harming this wonderful nationally-designated landscape. 'I would like to thank East Hampshire District Council which pursued this enforcement case with determination, making it clear we will not tolerate blatant breaches of planning.' The agreement sets out a 56-day deadline to carry out the work. Failure to comply with this type of legal agreement can lead to enforcement proceedings in the High Court which can lead to costly legal fees and even a custodial sentence.
Daily Mail
28-06-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Man at war with council after building a two-storey HOUSE on his driveway without permission
A businessman who built a towering second home in his garden has been ordered to tear it down - after it emerged he had only secured planning permission to build a modest garage. Raziq Ali was given the green light to replace a modest garage to the side of his £350,000 detached home near Bradford, West Yorkshire. Instead, the 41-year-old constructed what planning officials have described as a full-blown 'detached dwelling' with three floors and enough space for independent living. Bradford Council issued an enforcement notice in March, demanding Ali demolish the 85 sq/m structure within three months, after ruling that the illegal development completely 'dominates' the area. Yet when MailOnline visited the property, in a secluded avenue in the village of Thornton, building work was still taking place inside the annexe, which neighbours said had been kitted out with high-end furniture. A glazed corridor had also been constructed to link the two buildings together. Mr Ali, the director of a franchise of a chai tea shops, is said not to have lived at the property since purchasing it for £299,000 in 2021. Speaking over the phone, he claimed to have been led astray by builders who told him not to worry about planning permission. He said: 'We're going to appeal. It was my builder who was doing the application for me. It was my first time building something. 'He said 'no problem', 'I'll put the planning in for you, there will be no problem'. 'It was my first time doing anything so I left it to the builders. He said he would get all the paperwork in and would do everything. 'It was the builders who pulled me in that direction and said "don't worry about it". In 2022, Mr Ali was granted permission to demolish the existing garage adjacent to his three-bed home, after purchasing it the previous year for £299,000. In its place, council officials signed off on plans to build a larger 'garage/store' with a room in the loft, with the caveat that 'it is suitably designed and not detrimental to the amenity of existing nearby residents'. The council ruled that what has been built in its place is vastly larger and taller and goes far beyond the permissions Mr Ali was granted. A report refusing retrospective planning consent ruled: 'Having received planning permission for a replacement garage, the applicant has instead construct what is, in effect, a detached dwelling in the front of the house with not planning permission and persistently tried to retain the unauthorised building'. Mr Ali unsuccessfully applied three times for retrospective planning in a bid to make the costly development legal. In an application in 2023, he claimed the building was justified as his father had become disabled and that the structure would allow his parent to live in close proximity and 'receive the care he needs'. A later planning bid suggested the building would be used by care providers to stay over and provide assistance was also refused by planners who ruled that the 'size, design and appearance of the built annex is not appropriate or acceptable'. The council said that the garage conversion it had initially approved would have provided 'adequate additional space'. In May last year, the council issued an enforcement notice demanding the 'unauthorised three-storey building' be removed in three months. An appeal of that decision was dismissed in March by the Planning Inspectorate. Laura Renauden, an inspector appointed by the secretary of state, concluded in her report: 'Permission was obtained for a replacement garage building on the site, but the building constructed is somewhat larger than that permitted, and is said to have self-contained facilities. 'The council's design concerns are that it does not respond appropriately to its context, and that it does not achieve a relationship of subservience to the principal dwelling on the site. 'The three-storey element is a substantial addition, sited towards the front of the plot and rather overwhelming its surroundings.' Ms Renauden said she had been provided with 70 pages of medical records of an 'elderly relative' but said the documents lacked 'clarity'. She added: 'What exactly the medical issues are, the likely longevity of these, and any resulting need for or benefits from a residential annexe that might justify the permanent provision of the three-storey appeal structure are not explained. 'It is possible in some cases for the personal circumstances of an appellant to overcome a conflict with the development plan for the area, but those circumstances, and the consequential need for the particular development in issue, would require a clear explanation and justification. 'Those have not been supplied here.' In Sowden Grange, a small cluster of detached homes, neighbours claimed Mr Ali did not live at the property and that builders continued to work inside the illegally-built house. One suggested Mr Ali had spent more than £200,000 to build the structure, and now faces a costly demolition bill to raze to the ground. Another couple, who asked not to be named, said: 'To be honest, at this point, we just want the matter resolved. 'We'd prefer to have actual neighbours living there. We're more bothered by the constant building work. 'The work's been going on for over two years now. Every time they do anything, our garden ends up covered in dust and debris. 'If they demolish it, we'll go through the same disruption all over again.' When approached by MailOnline, Mr Ali said he had instructed solicitors to contest the council's enforcement action but declined to comment further. Breaching an enforcement notice can lead to proceedings in the criminal courts.
Daily Mail
03-06-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE The travellers' tactics: How travellers are obliterating Britain's prized countryside to turn them into concrete carbuncles for their caravans in illegal landgrabs
Travellers are using 'military' shock and awe-style tactics to obliterate areas of idyllic British countryside and turn them into concrete 'carbuncles' for their caravans, it can be revealed. Groups across the UK have been accused of carrying out brazen bank holiday 'landgrabs' to rapidly build camps under the noses of council chiefs while their offices are closed. Allegedly weaponising the national breaks, industrial diggers, excavators and lorries carrying gravel, are mobilised to rip up and pave over fields in protected green belts during 'deliberate and meticulously planned' operations. Cynically, the 'illegal' conversions are done without any planning permission, flouting development rules - with 'retrospective' applications later submitted to councils to allow the newly-constructed sites to remain. In the past month, at least two new encampments have been set up in West Sussex and Cheshire during the two May bank holidays, with fuming locals accusing travellers of making a 'mockery' of building laws. The latest unauthorised works took place in the quaint village of Burtonwood, near Warrington, in Cheshire, during last week's bank holiday, with travellers taking less than 72 hours to convert a field into a gravel car park. They covered half the open space in hardcore and also built a 10ft-high wooden fence around the boundary, with groups allegedly working through the night - much to the fury of dismayed locals. 'I have never felt so impotent as a councillor in not being able to do something,' local politician Stuart Mann said last night. 'The neighbours suffered for 36 hours solid that went through the night. It was a military operation in terms of how [the travellers] achieved it.' The works on the land appear to mirror a similar incident weeks earlier near the West Sussex town of Petworth, in the heart of the protected South Downs National Park, during the VE Day bank holiday at the start of May. A tranquil plot in Blind Lane, Lurgashall, was transformed into a building site as heavy machinery ploughed through the field without planning permission, turning it into gravel car park, with 10 caravans later appearing there. Local MP Andrew Griffith was left horrified by the unauthorised development and now fears travellers elsewhere could launch similar landgrabs if planning rules aren't tightened up. 'These are clearly deliberate and meticulously planned operations,' Mr Griffith, the Conservatives' Shadow Business and Trade Secretary, told MailOnline. 'In the Lurgashall case it took far too long for the local council to act leaving ratepayers and residents at the mercy of this devastating planning blight. 'It is clearly foreseeable that bank holiday weekends are the moment of maximum danger and yet that's when town halls fail to ensure staff cover.' Work at the six-acre Burtonwood site in Cheshire reportedly started at 6pm on Friday, May 23. MailOnline understands it came after travellers legitimately purchased the plot of land. Within hours, villagers reported excavators and tipper trucks working through the night to remove soil and replace it with concrete, completing the job in less than three days. Before and after aerial photographs show the extent of the destruction and more than a dozen caravans and other vehicles have since moved onto the site. Although a retrospective planning application has now been submitted to Warrington Borough Council, Cllr Mann said an investigation had been launched after complaints from locals, who say the land is green belt and should be for agricultural use only. He claimed to have been bombarded by 'hundreds' of emails from worried locals, with more than 50 people turning up at his surgery to express concerns. Speaking to MailOnline yesterday, Cllr Mann said the community had been left feeling 'helpless' and angry at the development. But it has also led to questions about how the local authority could have reacted to the issue, which could now take weeks to resolve despite an enforcement notice being issued. 'In my head, why was there nothing that could be done to at least put a pause on what was happening?' he said. 'Why couldn't someone turn up and say stop let's work something out.' Other residents have reportedly had applications for their own developments on neighbouring land refused by the council, according to Cllr Mann. 'We have to have a level of faith in the planning process but it needs to be fair for anybody to build something,' he added. Nigel Catlow, vice chairman, of Burtonwood and Westbrook Parish Council, described it as a 'very serious and fast-moving issue'. In a letter to the council, he said: 'The landowners appear to be in serious breach, making the most of the Bank Holiday and the council being on a long weekend. 'This is of great concern to many residents and council taxpayers in Burtonwood and the wider area of Warrington West.' Locals took to social media to express their anger, with one saying: 'The transformation is shocking.' Another, Jacqui Worrall, wrote: 'Breach!?.. it's a s****** concrete jungle!!!!' While Ray Houghton added: 'Blame the person who sold the land to them in the first place. The people doing this have no respect for the laws.' At the West Sussex site, efforts made to stop the development from going ahead appeared to fail. Builders arrived at the site on Friday, May 2, and work continued over the Bank Holiday weekend despite council notices and visits from Sussex Police. By Sunday afternoon, a septic tank was seen being delivered to the site as well as more gravel - with caravans later occupying the plot. A female council planning officer posted a second notice on the gate to the site on the Monday as three men carried on working. An earlier order to stop work was ignored. It's unclear who was responsible for the unauthorised development. However, Mr Griffith said locals had been left appalled by it. Speaking at the time, the MP for Arundel and South Downs said: 'I completely share the outrage and concern of residents about this illegal breach of all respected planning standards and behaviour. 'It makes a mockery of a system where we all jump through lengthy and costly hoops to install a dormer window when such brazen breaches happen unchecked.' The MP added the incident came 'almost a year to the day' that Chichester District Council's Lib Dem administration 'advertised a £50,000-a-year traveller liaison role which many felt sent precisely the wrong signal'. In May 2023, a beauty spot in the Cotswolds was ruined by travellers, who bulldozed their way onto a site they had not got permission to live on, despite the council trying to stop it happening for 17 years. People in Kayte Lane, a rural community below Cleeve Hill, in Southam, near Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, feared for years the unauthorised occupation of the land would happen before it finally did two years ago. Sixteen caravans plus several cars and vans entered the site, which the travellers moved onto over the late spring bank holiday. Travellers laid down hardstanding in the field, put up a high wooden fence along the edge of it and installed CCTV cameras, some of which overlook their neighbours. One local resident, who did not want to be identified, said the group used a bulldozer to clear vegetation from parts of the site when they moved on to it. It sparked a legal row, with locals last year accusing the authorities of not doing enough to prevent it from happening. Tewkesbury Borough Council first obtained a court order in 2007 to try to protect the greenbelt land, which is close to Cheltenham Racecourse, from being developed. It refused a retrospective planning application from the travellers in November 2023, after receiving more than 200 objections. But the unauthorised development still went ahead, sparking local fury. 'Tewkesbury Borough Council don't enforce anything. We're fighting against a brick wall,' one resident raged at the time.' Speaking last night, Mr Griffith urged action by Labour to clampdown on groups brazenly flouting planning laws nationally. 'The government must use the Planning and Infrastructure Bill currently going through Parliament to remove what increasingly feels to many like a 'two-tier' planning system,' he District Council has already secured a High Court injunction to halt further activity on the two-hectare field near Lurgashall. The injunction prohibits any further unauthorised works or vehicles and caravans entering the site. If a person fails to comply with the order, it could result in a jail term. Council leader Adrian Moss insisted the authority would 'not hesitate to take action' when planning rules are broken. 'We want to assure the community that we are doing everything in our power to respond to this. We will also be working with those on the site, local parish councils, and the local community, to offer support,' he said. A spokesman for Chichester District Council added: 'We take these matters incredibly seriously. We have planning rules in place to protect areas of countryside in our district, including the South Downs National Park, and if harmful development is carried out then we will take appropriate enforcement action. 'We want to assure the community that we are doing everything in our power to respond to this. We will also be working with those on the site, local parish councils, and the local community, to offer support.' Sussex Police told MailOnline it was aware of the traveller site but said it was a 'civil matter'. A spokesman for Warrington Borough Council confirmed it had 'established a priority enforcement case' over the situation in Burtonwood. 'We have received a report about a potential breach of planning on land off Farmers Lane in Burtonwood and are currently investigating the issue.'
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Homeowners beware: Efforts to save money could cost you big time
HONOLULU (KHON2) — The City is warning that an effort to save money could end up costing homeowners big time. A hefty fine was recently levied against a business owner for illegal construction activity on Oʻahu. Honolulu's Department of Planning and Permitting reduces permitting backlog The City and County of Honolulu said it is seeing an uptick in illegal construction activity that included a recent case where someone forged a professional engineer's stamp on building plans. They were fined $10,000 and ordered to stop work. 'And it can be anywhere within that project. It could be even during it where things start to go wrong and you start to notice it as a homeowner,' said Building Industry Association of Hawaiʻi CEO Roseann Building Industry Association of Hawaiʻi said contracting a company without a permit may seem appealing, but it almost always costs more in the long run. 'And unfortunately, you hear of those who get the money and then leave the site. But even further down the road, the project's done. It's not permitted appropriately. So, now if you go to sell a home, if you haven't permitted the work, you're going to have problems,' Freitas said. Experts said homeowners often think they are getting a good deal by going through an unlicensed contractor, but once the job is done or even when construction starts and gets underway, problems start building up. Honolulu's DPP to use artificial intelligence software to speed up permit process 'If there is an issue, you can go to RICO, the regulatory agency, for some remedies and see if they can help you,' said Freitas. The Regulated Industries Complaints Office can only help with remedies regarding licensed contractors. Tips for spotting unlicensed companies include not letting anyone pressure you into quick repairs or fast fixes. 'How straightforward are they with you? Or do they say, 'Oh, you really don't need a license.' Because here in the state, you really do need a license to do that type of work, and especially projects over $1,500,' Freitas said. The Department of Planning and Permitting said the recent violation was discovered during a review of building plans, and the business owner who aided and abetted the unlicensed contractor will have to foot the bill for a $10,000 fine. Download the free KHON2 app for iOS or Android to stay informed on the latest news 'That doesn't mean the state can't go after them. But for you as a homeowner, there's not a lot of recourse,' Freitas said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
