Motorhome shelter: Michel receives a town hall letter fourteen months later

Michel thought he had found the ideal solution: a timber shelter, open at the sides and wide enough to protect his motorhome from rain, leaves and frost. In his garden, the structure looked almost natural, set at the far end of the plot and well away from the road. Fourteen months later, an envelope from the town hall brought that everyday peace to an abrupt halt.

One Saturday in November, Michel watched rain stream down his motorhome and decided he could no longer put the project off. With two friends, several posts, a frame bought from a local timber merchant and plenty of coffee, he put up a wooden shelter over several weekends. He was pleased with the result: plain, sturdy and almost elegant. The neighbours said nothing. Then, fourteen months after the work was completed, a letter arrived from the planning department asking for an explanation of the undeclared structure. The language on the page felt cold. Yet outside, the shelter had not moved a centimetre. A discreet structure, however, is not necessarily an authorised one. And what follows can be costly.

A motorhome shelter may count as a structure in the eyes of the town hall

To Michel, it was not a “real house”, or even a garage: simply a roof to stop the motorhome’s seals deteriorating and its bodywork turning green over winter. This is often where the misunderstanding begins. A carport, a canopy anchored to the ground or a timber-framed shelter can be treated as a structure subject to planning rules, even without walls and even when it is largely open. The town hall does not look solely at the owner’s intention. It considers the ground footprint, height, position, external appearance and the rules set out in the Local Urban Plan, known as the PLU.

In many local authorities, a shelter larger than 5 m² requires at least a prior works declaration. Above certain limits-often a 20 m² ground footprint-a building permit may be required, with variations depending on the area and local rules. Michel had built a cover of around 32 m² so he could open his vehicle’s doors without knocking into the posts. On the scale of his plot, that figure seemed perfectly reasonable. From a planning perspective, it could be enough to move the application into a different category. To be honest, nobody measures these things every day-until the question lands on the doormat.

The fourteen-month delay does not mean the structure has become compliant. The authorities may learn about it through a site visit, aerial photography, a neighbour, a council officer or an application connected with another project. In some villages, officers know every plot and quickly spot a new roof behind a hedge. The letter Michel received was not necessarily an immediate condemnation. It may have been a request for information or an invitation to submit a retrospective regularisation application. Everything depends on the shelter’s exact nature, the local rules and whether the project can be made compliant. Silence from those nearby is never the same as permission.

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

The first sensible step is to reread every line of the letter and identify the stated response deadline. Michel did the right thing by arranging an appointment with his town hall’s planning department instead of making an annoyed phone call from his gate. He took photographs, the shelter’s dimensions, a cadastral plan and receipts for the materials. The meeting does not replace formal permission, but it helps clarify the issue: no declaration, excessive surface area, insufficient distance from the property boundary, a non-compliant roof colour or a location within a protected area. A well-prepared file prevents vague discussions, which rarely end well.

Many owners try to play it down: “It’s only a roof”, “the neighbours have the same thing”, “I can take it down if necessary”. These reactions are understandable, and sometimes genuine, but they solve nothing administratively. Where possible, regularisation is usually the best route. Depending on the dimensions and circumstances, this may involve a prior declaration submitted after the work or a building permit. If the shelter does not comply with the PLU, changes 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 wise to check the documents available on the local authority website or at the counter: the PLU’s written rules, zoning plan, easements, setback requirements and any heritage restrictions. An architect, surveyor or planning-law professional can also help with complicated cases, particularly if the town hall 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 that apply to the plot.”

• Keep the letter and record its precise date of receipt.
• Measure the ground footprint, height and distances to 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 may be simple, but it is never entirely private

Michel’s story will resonate with many homeowners because it sits on that blurred line between weekend DIY and an act of construction. People want to protect a vehicle bought after years of saving, store wood, create a shaded spot or stop rain damaging what is kept outside. In everyday life, the shelter appears 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 town hall before work begins can prevent months of stress afterwards. Rules can feel 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 set everything out clearly, establish what can be regularised and speak to the relevant departments before the situation becomes more severe. Between an improvised shelter and a perfectly planned building project lies a distinctly French reality of rough sketches, watchful neighbours and regulations that can sometimes be difficult to read. 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 can be regulated	A carport, canopy or timber structure may require a prior declaration or a building permit.	Avoid assuming that an open structure automatically falls outside the rules.
Fourteen months regularise nothing	Time passing after completion does not turn an unauthorised structure into a compliant installation.	Understand why a late letter deserves a prompt response.
Discussion is often the first step	Plans, measurements, photographs and consulting the PLU help prepare a possible regularisation application.	Take a methodical approach rather than endure anxiety or allow the case to lie dormant.