Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to take planning enforcement action. It is unlikely we would find fault which has caused him his alleged injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council has failed to take planning enforcement action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Background

5. Mr X says his neighbour built an outbuilding in their garden which he says adversely affects him. The Council granted planning permission for the building. Mr X says it has not been built in accordance with that permission.
6. The Council says it visited the property twice to assess the development. It says it is largely built in accordance with the planning permission. It says the height is around 0.1 metre higher than approved. It accepts it has been built 0.2 metres closer to Mr X’s property than the approved plans. It says these are minor breaches and not expedient to pursue enforcement action.
7. Mr X says the Council officers lied about a site visit. The Council deny this.
8. We asked Mr X to provide details of the building’s measurements as now built. The figures he gave us show he believes the height is around 0.5 metres higher than he believes was approved. However, the approved plans show a total height around the same as built.

Analysis

9. Councils can take enforcement action if they find planning rules have been breached. However, councils should not take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
10. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. When deciding whether to enforce, councils should consider the likely impact of harm to the public and whether they might grant approval if they were to receive an application for the development or use.
11. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Our role is not to ask whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
12. I have considered the steps the organisation took to consider the issue, and the information it took account of when deciding not to take enforcement action. Even if Mr X is right and one of the visits did not happen, given the measurements Mr X has provided it is unlikely another visit would result in a different Council decision.
13. On balance, it is unlikely we could find fault which has caused Mr X an injustice in the Council’s decision not to take planning enforcement action.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find fault which has caused him his claimed injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman