The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because it is not yet possible to determine if the complainant has suffered significant injustice because of any fault with the Council’s enforcement investigation.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control. Mr X says there have been long delays and the Council has failed to keep him updated. Mr X says the matter has been time consuming and stressful.
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: any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action. Government guidance stresses the importance of affective enforcement action to maintain public confidence in the planning system but says councils should act proportionately. Informal action can often be the quickest and most cost-effective way of achieving a satisfactory result. The council may also request a retrospective application to regularise the situation. However, if the development is considered unacceptable, it may be necessary to take other action to secure compliance such as serving a breach of condition or enforcement notice.
Mr X is not happy with how the Council dealt with his concerns about his neighbour’s outbuilding and says it has not answered his questions about whether the development is allowed. The Council accepts there have been delays and that it has not kept Mr X updated with its progress. However, the Council’s enforcement investigation is ongoing. The Council says it will carry out a site visit to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if further action is necessary. As the Council’s enforcement investigation has not yet concluded it is not yet possible to say if Mr X has suffered any significant injustice because of any delays by the Council. This is because the Council may still decide the outbuilding is acceptable or that it is permitted development as Mr X’s neighbour claims. Mr X can make a new complaint to the Ombudsman once the Council has concluded its enforcement investigation should he remain unhappy.
Mr X has also complained about the Council’s complaint handling. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as complaint handling.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is not yet possible to say if he has suffered any significant injustice because of any fault with the Council’s enforcement investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman