Enforcement


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • West Dorset District Council (17 003 400)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 19-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate this complaint about planning enforcement. The complainant has appealed to a government minister about the Council's refusal of planning permission and a subsequent enforcement notice.

  • West Berkshire Council (17 003 306)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 19-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate how the Council has dealt with the complainant's concerns about development at his neighbour's property. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Stafford Borough Council (17 002 321)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 19-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council decided to take enforcement action, the way it has dealt with requests for access to information and its decision not to take enforcement action against neighbouring properties. This is because it is unlikely we will find fault in the Council's actions.

  • Cornwall Council (16 007 143)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 19-Jun-2017

    Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how the Council investigated Mr and Mrs X's complaints of noise from a neighbouring property. There is also no evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision that there was no change of use at the property and works to the garden did not require planning permission.

  • Cheshire West & Chester Council (16 005 876)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 16-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Council failed to respond properly to Mr X's correspondence and wrongly told him there was no breach of planning control at a site next to his property, though it dealt with the planning breach without fault. The Council will apologise and pay Mr X £350 for the time and trouble the failure caused him and his delayed opportunity to pursue another route.

  • London Borough of Ealing (15 012 989)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 16-Jun-2017

    Summary: There was no fault in how the Council dealt with planning matters when Mr B's neighbour built an extension.

  • London Borough Of Brent (17 002 071)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 16-Jun-2017

    Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of Ms Y that the Council acted unreasonably in assessing whether planning enforcement action should be taken. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because he cannot be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to support the complaint and there is ultimately a right of appeal to a Planning Inspector.

  • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (16 016 504)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 16-Jun-2017

    Summary: The play equipment about which Mrs B complains was erected over five years before she made her complaint to the Council and to the Ombudsman. It is therefore too old to investigate further.

  • Wiltshire Council (16 014 114)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 16-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Council was not at fault in failing to take formal enforcement action against the occupier of a shop when he installed an air compressor unit without planning permission.

  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (17 002 330)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 12-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B's complaint that the Council did not notify her about two planning applications and has taken too long to investigate the matter. This is because Mrs B has not suffered a significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault. Also, an investigation into Mrs B's complaint about the conduct of officers is unlikely to find fault and would not achieve part of the outcome Mrs B seeks.

;