Summary: There was fault by the Council as an initial complaint was not properly passed to the correct department. The Council remedied this fault by apologising and providing the complainant with the details to make his complaints directly to the correct department. The Council also gave the wrong advice, as it said damage to a highway was a civil matter but has now corrected this advice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s response to his complaint about breaches of planning conditions at a neighbour’s house. Mr X says the Council’s unsatisfactory response has made the situation worse. He complains about noise from a neighbouring hot tub and parking problems on a narrow lane.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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 read the papers put in by Mr X.
5. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
6. Mr X and the organisation 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

Key facts

7. The Council granted planning permission for a replacement house on a neighbouring site, which Mr X complains has not complied with planning conditions.
8. Mr X says he telephoned the Council on 4 July 2022 to make his complaint because the Council’s email system wasn’t working. The Council has no record of this complaint but Mr X says his telephone bill confirms he spent 45 minutes on the phone to the Council’s number.
9. Mr X emailed the Council on 8 August 2022. He complained that he had not had a response to his telephone complaint. He complained that his neighbours house did not comply with the planning permission as:
• The owner had changed the internal layout to include a fifth bedroom, which would mean parking problems for any extra cars.
• The owner had put in a hot tub outside, which was causing noise problems.
• There were parking problems on the narrow lane.
10. The Council responded to Mr X’s stage one complaint on 5 September 2022. It said the planning department had not received a complaint from Mr X. It included a website link for Mr X to report planning breaches and did not uphold his complaint.
11. Mr X replied the next day. He complained the Council had lost the complaint he made in July and the reply was unsatisfactory. The Council responded on 24 October 2022.
12. The Council said ‘In relation to the call to the Customer Contact Team in July 2022 the call was logged in the internal system and forwarded to the correct service, in this case the planning inbox. Unfortunately, the team that manages this inbox have no record of your logged correspondence. We are unsure why this occurred and can only apologise that it did’.
13. The Council then responded to Mr X’s complaint points:
• It supplied links to the planning enforcement and noise teams so Mr X could report the hot tub if he wished to.
• It said internal alterations to create a fifth bedroom are not development and so are not a breach of the planning condition.
• It said damage to the road after construction would be a civil matter as it is an unclassified road.
14. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman. He said that he told the Council of the problems but they have refused to do anything about them and the Council have become part of the nuisance by their non-action. Mr X says he wants the Council to investigate and require the owner to properly comply with the approved plans. The Council responded to this complaint saying:
• The planning enforcement department had no record of a complaint about a hot tub.
• The Environmental Health Team had no record of noise complaints from Mr X.
• The Council had given wrong information about the road being unclassified. It said that any damage to the road would need to be reported to the Council's Highways Team and supplied a link.

My analysis

Internal alterations

15. Mr X says the Council is wrong. He believes the internal alteration to create a fifth bedroom is an alteration of the house which is prevented by the planning condition.
16. Planning condition 3 says ‘notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking, re-enacting or modifying that Order), no development within Classes A, C, D and E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the said Order shall be carried out without an express grant of planning permission, namely:
• The enlargement, improvement or other alteration of the dwellinghouse;
• Any other alterations to the roof of the dwellinghouse;
• The erection or construction of a porch outside any external door of the dwelling;
• The provision within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse of any building or enclosure, swimming or other pool required for a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house as such, or the maintenance, improvement or other alteration of such a building or enclosure.
17. Part 2, Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 says ‘the following operations or uses of land shall not be taken to involve development: the carrying out of building works which only affect the interior of the building’.
18. I find no fault by the Council on this point. Internal alterations to the property are not classed as development under the legislation and so I cannot see that they are prevented by the planning condition.

Complaint response

19. Mr X complains that his initial telephone complaint was not passed through correctly to the planning department. The Council has accepted it was at fault on this point and apologised. Mr X also complains that some of the paperwork and photographs he emailed to the Council have not been returned to him and he has not been able to find copies of the sent emails. Unfortunately, if neither the Council or Mr X have kept a copy there is nothing more that can be investigated on this point.
20. I understand Mr X feels that he made his complaint to the Council in July and it was the Council’s responsibility to investigate from this point onwards. There was fault, in that this first complaint was not passed on.
21. The Council then told Mr X that he needed to complain directly to each department involved and provided website links. Mr X complains that this is not reasonable and the Council should not need him to make the complaint again.
22. In my view, although there was initial fault, the Council apologised and told Mr X within a month of the process he needed to follow to register his complaint about the hot tub. Mr X has not done so and I cannot find fault after this point. It is reasonable for Mr X to follow the process set out by the Council to make his individual complaints about noise and planning issues related to the hot tub.
23. The Council was also at fault as it said the road is unclassified rather than telling him of the correct way to make complaints about road damage. It has now rectified this by sending the link to the correct process. If Mr X does not wish to complain using the internet links, then the links provided by the Council also include the address to write to and a telephone number.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have completed my investigation of this complaint. There was fault by the Council, but I consider the apology already given to Mr X in the Council’s response to his stage 2 complaint is an adequate remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman