Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement investigation. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely further investigation would achieve anything worthwhile for Ms X.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about the actions of a planning enforcement officer who visited her property. She says the officer was disrespectful, inappropriate and rude and that they failed to explain the nature of the alleged breach they were investigating.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X’s complaint focuses on the conduct of the Council’s planning enforcement officer during their visit to her property to establish if there was a breach of planning control. Her allegations that the officer was disrespectful, inappropriate and rude concern the way the officer spoke to her and are therefore largely subjective. Ms X has provided no evidence of exactly what the officer said, or the way in which they said it, and I cannot therefore make any finding on whether their conduct amounted to fault.
6. Ms X is concerned the officer did not tell her what the alleged breach they were investigating was about, but she also says the officer misled her into thinking it concerned a breach of condition relating to a grant of planning permission it had given her to extend her property. Again, there is no way to know what the officer said to Ms X during their visit but even if they did not clarify the nature of the breach they were investigating this would not warrant investigation. The issue is minor and the Council has confirmed it took no further action and that the case is closed.
7. Ms X says she felt very ill after the officer’s visit and had to seek medical and counselling intervention. But this is essentially a claim for personal injury, which is a matter for the courts. We cannot determine what impact the officer’s actions had on Ms X’s health, or the extent to which any fault by the Council was responsible. This is because the Council is under a duty to investigate planning enforcement complaints and the process, even where it is followed properly, can cause some stress to those involved. But this is not itself evidence of fault in the way a case has been handled.
8. Ms X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely further investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Ms X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman