Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a possible breach of planning control. This is because part of the complaint is late. It is unlikely we would find fault in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

The complaint

1. Ms X has complained about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control and its decision not to take enforcement action. Ms X has also raised concerns about the Council’s decision to grant her neighbour’s planning application. Ms X says the development has a significant impact on her property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action. Government guidance stresses the importance of affective enforcement action to maintain public confidence in the planning system but says councils should act proportionately. Council’s do not need to take formal action just because there has been a planning breach.
8. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body against enforcement decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
9. In this case, I am satisfied the Council properly looked into Ms X’s concerns before it decided the outbuilding complied with permitted development rights and there had been no planning breach.
10. Ms X says the development has a significant impact on her home and garden and the Council did not visit her property to fully assess this. However, there is no requirement for councils to visit neighbouring properties when considering a possible planning breach. The Council has explained why planning permission was not required for the development. As the outbuilding complies with permitted development rights the Council has no grounds on which to take enforcement action, and it cannot take the impact on neighbouring amenity into account.
11. I understand Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide there had not been a breach. As the Council properly considered if it was necessary to take enforcement action, it is unlikely I could find fault.
12. Ms X has also complained about the Council’s decision to grant her neighbour planning permission to extend their property. However, I consider this part of Ms X’s complaint late. A complaint is late if it has taken someone more than a year to complain to the Ombudsman. It has been a few years since the Council granted planning permission and Ms X has been aware of the issues she has raised about the application for more than 12 months. I see no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate as Ms X could have complained to the Ombudsman sooner.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because part of the complaint is late. We are unlikely to find fault in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman