Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with breaches of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Ms X has complained about how the Council has dealt with breaches of planning control. Ms X says the Council has allowed her neighbour to ignore planning rules and believes the development may damage her property.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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.
6. 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.
7. In this case, the Council looked into Ms X’s concerns and enforcement and building control officers have visited the site. The Council said that some of the work carried out is permitted development and other work was rectified to comply with permitted development rights. The Council also invited Ms X’s neighbour to make a retrospective application to regularise the development built.
8. I understand Ms X may disagree with the Council’s decision not to take formal enforcement action against her neighbour. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide enforcement action was not necessary. Councils also do not need to take formal action just because there has been a breach of planning control, and it is not unusual for councils to take informal action or request a retrospective planning application. As the Council properly considered if it should take enforcement action, it is unlikely I would find fault.
9. Ms X has raised concerns about drainage at the site. The Council’s building control officer visited the site and requested that additional work be completed before the building is signed off. Ms X is concerned her home may be damaged by the development, but this will be a private civil matter between Ms X and her neighbour.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman