Michel’s camper-van shelter: a council letter arrives fourteen months later

Michel believed he had found the perfect answer: a timber shelter, open at the sides and wide enough to protect his camper van from rain, falling leaves and frost. At the bottom of his garden plot, well away from the road, it looked almost as though it belonged there. Fourteen months later, an envelope from the council shattered that very ordinary peace.

One Saturday in November, Michel watched rain stream over his camper van and decided he could no longer put the project off. With two friends, a handful of posts, a frame bought from a local builders’ merchant and plenty of coffee, he put up a wooden shelter over several weekends. He was pleased with the result: uncomplicated, sturdy and almost elegant. The neighbours said nothing. Then, fourteen months after the work was completed, a letter arrived from the planning department requesting an explanation for the undeclared structure. The wording on the page felt impersonal. Yet in the yard, the shelter had not moved by a centimetre. Still, an unobtrusive structure is not necessarily an authorised one. And the consequences can be costly.

A camper-van shelter can count as a structure in the council’s eyes

To Michel, it was neither a “proper house” nor even a garage: simply a roof to stop the camper van’s seals deteriorating and its bodywork turning green through the winter. This is often where the misunderstanding begins. A carport, a canopy fixed to the ground or a timber-framed shelter may be treated as a structure subject to planning rules, even without walls and even if it remains largely open. The council does not assess the owner’s intention alone. It considers the footprint, height, position, external appearance and the requirements set out in the local development plan, known in France as the PLU.

In many French local authorities, a shelter exceeding 5 m² requires at least a prior declaration of works. Above certain limits, often a 20 m² footprint, planning permission may be required, although this varies according to the zone and local rules. Michel had built a cover of roughly 32 m² so he could open his vehicle doors without hitting the posts. On the scale of his plot, that figure appeared reasonable. For the planning department, however, it could be enough to place the case in a different category. Let us be honest: hardly anyone measures these things every day, until the question lands on the doormat.

The fourteen-month delay does not mean the structure has become lawful. The authorities may learn about it through a site visit, an aerial photograph, a neighbour, a council officer or an application connected to another project. In some villages, officers know every plot and quickly notice a new roof behind a hedge. Michel’s letter was not necessarily an immediate penalty. It may have been a request for information or an invitation to submit a retrospective application. Everything depends on the precise nature of the shelter, the local rules and whether the project can be brought into compliance. Silence from those around you is never the same as permission.

When a planning letter arrives, the mistake is to let it drift

The first helpful step is to read every line of the letter again and identify the stated response deadline. Michel made the right choice by arranging a meeting with his council’s planning department, rather than making an irritated phone call from his gate. He brought photographs, the shelter’s measurements, a cadastral plan and the material invoices. This meeting does not replace permission, but it helps establish what is being challenged: no declaration, excessive surface area, insufficient distance from the boundary, a non-compliant roof colour or location within a protected area. A well-prepared file prevents vague discussions, which rarely end well.

Many owners try to play the matter down: “It’s only a roof”, “the neighbours have the same thing”, “I can take it down if necessary”. These are understandable, and sometimes sincere, remarks, but they resolve nothing administratively. Where available, retrospective approval is usually the best route. Depending on the dimensions and circumstances, this may involve a prior declaration filed after the works or a planning permission application. If the shelter does not comply with the PLU, alterations may sometimes have to be considered: shortening the roof, moving a post, changing the covering or reducing the footprint. It is not pleasant, but it can be less painful than a dispute that drags on.

Before replying, Michel would be well advised to check the documents available on the council website or at the counter: the written PLU rules, zoning plan, easements, setback requirements and any heritage restrictions. An architect, surveyor or planning-law specialist can also clarify complex cases, particularly when the council refers to bringing the structure into compliance.

“A structure built without formalities is not automatically destined for demolition, but it must be capable of being regularised and comply with the rules applying to the plot.”

• Keep the letter and record the precise date on which it was received.
• Measure the footprint, height and distances from the plot boundaries.
• Consult the PLU before submitting any application or altering the shelter.
• Reply within the requested deadline, even if the file is not yet complete.

Building at home is straightforward, but never entirely private

Michel’s story will resonate with many homeowners because it touches on the blurred line between weekend DIY and an act of construction. People want to protect a vehicle bought after years of saving, store firewood, create a shaded spot or prevent rain damaging what is kept outside. In everyday life, the shelter seems modest. On a cadastral plan or in planning regulations, it takes on a different scale. That does not mean every project ends in a dispute. Above all, it is a reminder that a call to the council before work begins can prevent months of stress afterwards. The rules can seem distant, until they arrive in a white envelope.

The letter received fourteen months later probably felt like a cold shower for Michel. Yet it also creates an opportunity: to review the position, establish what can be regularised and speak to the appropriate departments before matters become more serious. Between the improvised shelter and the perfectly planned building project lies a distinctly French reality of rough sketches, watchful neighbours and regulations that can be difficult to interpret. Sharing this kind of experience can help others, because a simple wooden roof often conceals far more questions than one might imagine.

Key point	Detail	Benefit for the reader
A shelter may be regulated	A carport, canopy or timber structure may require a prior declaration or planning permission.	Avoid assuming that an open structure is automatically exempt from the rules.
Fourteen months does not regularise anything	Time passing after the work does not turn an unauthorised structure into a compliant installation.	Understand why a late letter deserves a swift response.
Dialogue is often the first step	Plans, measurements, photographs and consultation of the PLU help prepare a possible retrospective application.	Act methodically rather than endure the worry or leave the case unresolved.