Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of planning enforcement over a breach of planning regulations. It was reasonable for the applicant to appeal against refusal of retrospective planning application to the Planning Inspectorate.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s threat of taking enforcement action over a breach of planning regulations related to development which he has carried out. He says it is unreasonable to threaten such action due to his age and disability.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X says he has been threatened with enforcement action following a breach of the approved plans for development which he has carried out. The Council advised Mr X that he had breached the approved plans which he obtained permission for and required him to rectify the breach. He submitted a retrospective application for the unauthorised work he carried out but this was refused by the Council. He subsequently appealed the refusal to the Planning Inspectorate and is awaiting a decision.
7. Local planning authorities have responsibility for taking whatever enforcement action may be necessary, in the public interest where a breach of planning control is identified. Government guidance says councils should act proportionally. To decide this, councils should consider whether they would approve the unlawful development, if they had received an application. This is usually achieved by asking the developer to submit a retrospective application. In this case the Council took this action and the outcome is awaited from the Planning Inspectorate. The Inspector’s decision will be binding on both Mr X and the Council.
8. If the inspector refuses Mr X’s appeal the Council will need to re-consider what enforcement action may be required. In deciding whether enforcement action is taken, local planning authorities should, where relevant, have regard to the potential impact on the health, housing needs and welfare of those affected by the proposed action, and those who are affected by a breach of planning control. Any enforcement notice served will also be subject to a right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.
9. We will not investigate a complaint where it was reasonable for someone to appeal against refusal of planning permission and Mr X has already exercised his right of appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of planning enforcement over a breach of planning regulations. It was reasonable for the applicant to appeal against refusal of retrospective planning application to the Planning Inspectorate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman