Summary: Mr B complained about the Council’s failure to respond to his complaints about an enforcement matter which caused him confusion. We found fault with the way the Council responded to his complaints. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay him £100.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained that the London Borough of Camden (the Council) failed to respond to his enquiries or his complaint about a neighbour’s failure to comply with a remedial notice to reduce the height of a boundary hedge. This has caused Mr B frustration and uncertainty over whether the situation will be resolved.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. Mr B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. In January 2024 the Council wrote to Mr B’s neighbour about a high hedge on the boundary between their two properties. In February 2024 it issued an enforcement notice requiring the hedge to be reduced in height within two months.
6. The neighbour appealed the notice to the Planning Inspectorate. The Council received a copy of the appeal acknowledgement letter.
7. In May 2024 Mr B complained to the Council that the neighbour was breaching the enforcement notice, and the Council opened an enforcement investigation.
8. In June 2024 Mr B complained to the Council that he had not received a response from the planning team. The Council replied in July 2024 saying the issue was not a matter for the complaints process as it was a request for a service, so it had referred the matter back to the planning team for a response. Mr B then complained to us.
9. In response to my enquiries the Council said it only received the official start letter regarding the appeal from the Planning Inspectorate in December 2024. It said it would normally keep interested parties updated but the officer was unable to do so due to unforeseen circumstances. It apologised for the fact the team manager did not keep Mr B updated. The Council has also confirmed that the appeal process does not allow Mr B to comment. The appeal is ongoing.
10. The Council has also acknowledged that it made an error in not progressing Mr B’s communications as a formal complaint.

Analysis

11. I understand that the Council cannot progress an enforcement matter while an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate is ongoing. I also accept that there are delays within the Planning Inspectorate affecting the time it is taking to deal with appeals, and this is outside the Council’s control.
12. However, I do expect the Council to provide accurate information in response to a complaint. It appears the Council received a copy of the acknowledgement letter from the Planning Inspectorate to the neighbour in April 2024, so it was aware of the appeal. I consider the Council should have provided this information to Mr B in response to his complaint to the planning team in May 2024. When it received his formal complaint in June 2024, it had another opportunity to inform Mr B about the appeal, and also to apologise for the lack of response from the planning team. It failed to do either of these things, causing Mr B to complain to us which was avoidable. This was fault which caused Mr B injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

13. In recognition of the injustice caused to Mr B I recommended the Council within one month of the date of my final decision, apologises to Mr B and makes a symbolic payment to him of £100.
14. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I consider this is a proportionate way of putting right the injustice caused to Mr B and Mr C and I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman