Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a planning enforcement notice. We cannot achieve a meaningful outcome by investigating the matter. It is for Mrs X’s landlord to challenge the Council’s decisions via the legal processes available to them.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council wrongly decided she was breaching an enforcement notice it served upon her landlord, by remaining in a property as a guardian. Mrs X said this led to her being unfairly at risk of eviction. She said the Council also did not deal properly with her complaint.
2. Mrs X wanted the Ombudsman to determine whether she was a guardian or tenant, and whether she was in breach of the enforcement notice. She wanted the Council to recognise her as a property guardian rather than a tenant, accept she was not breaching the notice, and allow her to stay in the property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. 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)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mrs X complains about a planning enforcement notice the Council served upon her landlord. This notice requires that the landlord’s property is not used for residential purposes until it has been reopened for its intended purpose. Mrs X says she and her family reside at the property as guardians rather than tenants, and she says therefore they are not in breach of the enforcement notice.
9. Mrs X’s landlord used their right to appeal the enforcement notice to the Planning Inspector (PI). The PI upheld the notice and Mrs X’s landlord served her an eviction notice. Mrs X says, however, the landlord was reluctant to do so as they did not agree her family should be evicted. The Council is considering applying to court for an injunction due to its view a breach of planning control continues.
10. We are not an appeal body. We cannot interpret the law or the wording of the Council’s enforcement notice. It is not for us to say whether Mrs X is a guardian or tenant, and it is not for us to determine whether there is a breach of planning control. We could not change the decision of the PI.
11. Mrs X’s landlord had the opportunity to present the arguments Mrs X has brought to us, as part of the appeal process. Mrs X was not a party to that process, because she was not the recipient of the enforcement notice. However, this does not mean we can interfere in a decision made by the PI.
12. Should the Council commence court action against Mrs X’s landlord, it is open to Mrs X to seek legal advice to find out whether she may apply to be included in proceedings as an interested party. The courts are best placed to consider the arguments Mrs X has brought. We cannot achieve anything worthwhile by investigating this complaint.
13. It is not a good use of public resources to consider complaint-handling alone when we cannot consider the substantive matter. We will not therefore consider Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council handled her complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we could not achieve a meaningful outcome by doing so. It is for Mrs X’s landlord to challenge the Council’s decisions via the legal processes available to them.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman