The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take planning enforcement action. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mrs X complained about the Council’s failure to take enforcement action against householders near her home whom she says have breached conditions attached to the planning approval for the site.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs X says the Council has failed to take action against householders who have breached planning conditions attached to the estate housing when it was approved by the Council. She says this includes the installation of a gate in a wall alongside a right of way and the use of pine colour woodstain on fences when the conditions stipulated a dark colour.
The Council investigated her complaints and told her that the condition relating to gates in the wall was intended to prevent the construction of vehicle access or removal of the wall. In its view small pedestrian gates did not breach the condition’s intention. Mrs X disagrees with this view. The Council told Mrs X that it would not take enforcement action because there were no breaches of planning approval which would warrant this. It does not believe that taking such action would be sustainable should it be appealed.
Planning enforcement is a discretionary power which local planning authorities may use where they believe it is expedient and there is sufficient harm to the public interest. The Council has explained why it considers this does not apply in this case. When considering complaints, we may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members when there is no fault. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions.
The Council properly considered Mrs X’s complaints but concluded that the claimed breaches did not warrant the use of its discretionary powers.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take planning enforcement action. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman