LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take suitable enforcement action to ensure a developer implemented landscaping in accordance with approved plans. There was no fault in the Council’s decision-making. The Council was at fault for delay and some poor communication. However, its earlier apology to Mr X is sufficient remedy for the injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s housing register decision because its decision was in line with its published allocations scheme and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms Z’s complaint about the Council’s design process for a leisure facility. This is because it is unlikely our involvement could achieve anything more than the Council’s response and we could not achieve the outcome Ms Z wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council’s failure to demonstrate a 5-year housing land supply is affecting its decisions on planning applications. The complainant has not yet suffered a significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault, we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome, and we cannot recommend disciplinary action against council officers.

We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council failed to comply with a decision by the Planning Inspector and incurred her losses of more than £3,000. This is because it would be reasonable for Mrs X to make a claim against the Council at court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to ignore breaches of planning control and building regulations. We do not consider the complainant has suffered significant personal injustice because the Council’s actions. The complainant also raises concerns about council tax banding and benefit fraud. These matters are dealt with by bodies outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault. It is also not yet possible to determine if the complainant has suffered significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to investigate a complaint that a councillor breached the Council’s code of conduct and refused to allow Mrs X to be interviewed at home. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made these decisions to justify an investigation. Also it is reasonable to expect Mrs X to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office with her complaint about the Council withholding information.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s request for pre-application planning advice. This is because we are unlikely to find fault. The complainant also has the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a planning application because the injustice does not warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not responding to Mr B’s subject access request. This is because Mr B may complain to the Information Commissioner who is in the best position to consider this complaint.

Summary: Mr D says the Council failed to follow the correct process for a planning application. We have upheld the complaint because there were some errors by the Council which it already acknowledged and apologised for in 2023. We have completed the investigation because there is no additional fault or outstanding injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to accept information on a planning application which he considers is unfit for purpose. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council decided to accept the information. Also, we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

The complainant, I shall call Miss X, says the Council is failing to enforce the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for a development site opposite her home.

Summary: We have discontinued our investigation. The Council has taken enforcement action against Mrs X’s neighbour. Further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different or better outcome for Mrs X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of breaches of planning control and subsequent retrospective planning applications. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement matter. This is because the Council’s actions have not caused Mr X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take formal enforcement action for a breach of a planning condition. We have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. This is because the complaint is late and the injustice Mr X claims is entirely speculative.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council provided incorrect information in local land charges searches regarding the Permitted Development rights for a property he purchased. The Council’s failure to record the removal of permitted development rights as a local land charge which is discoverable through a search of the local land charges register is fault. This fault has caused Mr X an injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.