Free legal advice on recreational permits

Questioner

My 91 year old mother has a problem with the municipality of Ameland. In the 1980s, my parents obtained a recreational permit for their home. This was a rather clumsily written permit stating that the permit is valid for the period that it is their property. Now my brother had the house in his name for a while because my father couldn't handle it. When my father passed away, the property was transferred to my mother's name. It is a monumental building that was saved from destruction by my parents, it was a complete ruin, and is used by my mother, her children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren and when it is free it is rented out to tourists. We believe that the recreational permit is still valid and have communicated this to the municipality twice in the past year. The municipality threatened a penalty. Today we received a response from the municipality that our objection has not been honored and that it is now demanding a penalty of 1,000 euros per day with a maximum of 25,000 euros, starting tomorrow. They base this on the fact that they had found that the house had been rented out for recreational purposes on May 9, but this was not the case, it was a daughter with family who was living there. .

Lawyer

The recreational permit: did that mean that your family was allowed to live there and rent out part of the house to tourists, for example? What was the function of the house at the time and according to the current zoning plan, now? I understand that you have already completed the objection phase, I am curious about the documents in this case. You may send them, without obligation, after you have made direct contact.

Questioner

I am writing this on behalf of my 91 year old mother (as she would put it) History: my husband (Hofker) comes from Ameland, like almost all Hofkers. We were allowed to rent the entire house to tourists. In practice, my children, grandchildren and lately also great-grandchildren often stay there for 1 or 2 weeks, often during the school holidays. When we were not there, it was rented to tourists. Because the building is located in the village centre of Nes, Ameland, we could rent it out almost all year round. The function for that: the house from 1684 was a ruin, actually uninhabitable for several decades. My husband and I saved the house + the house next to it from destruction with the help of Monumentenzorg. The municipality of Ameland has a regulation on the use of homes. In 1989, my husband and I were granted an exemption from this ordinance for the 'period' that we owned this home. This exemption does not contain any other provisions than that the exemption ceases as soon as the owner of the home actually starts living there, or upon the death of both parties. My husband had Alzheimer's in 2005 that was getting worse. He wanted to get rid of the house. My son, who had also helped, was forced to agree and managed the business and my husband went completely crazy and also had the house legally put in my son's name. My son then got into an argument with the municipality of Ameland and the house was in danger of being used by waitresses in the hotels, there are already several houses on Ameland that are so run down, and I and my children, grandchildren etc. would no longer be able to stay there. My husband had passed away (May 15, 2012) and I interpreted the (clumsy) exemption received from the municipality of Ameland as still being valid and, together with the entire family, we persuaded my son to transfer the house back into my name, which meant that I once again met the 'period' that I own a home. This was done in the autumn of 2016, so that now, my children, myself, etc. can enjoy a nice holiday on Ameland again during these months.

Lawyer

I still find it a complex story, but a permit for exploitation does not apply to use by direct family, at least that is how the linguistic and purposeful explanation should be understood. Furthermore, you can also look in the zoning plan how the municipality sees that. You must first make direct contact and then you can send me the documents in e-mail attachments.

Lawyer

The recreational permit you mentioned will be a withdrawal permit based on the housing regulation. If this had not been drawn up correctly, it was not contested at the time and can therefore be considered correct. Of course, the question is whether this permit is still valid. I understand that you and your family use the home as a 'second home'. Based on the housing regulation, converting a regular home into a 'second home' can be considered a withdrawal and a withdrawal permit may be required. If the previous permit were no longer valid and such a permit were actually required, the board is in principle obliged to take administrative action. That also appears to have happened. In the context of administrative action against an alleged withdrawal without a permit, the board should in principle investigate whether there are possibilities for legalization. Of course, one should investigate whether there is actually a conflicting (illegal) situation. An appeal may be filed against the decision on objection. Please note the deadline for filing. If no appeal is filed, the decision (order subject to penalty) becomes irrevocable.