Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning enforcement at the housing development site where Mr X’s property is located. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has mishandled the planning enforcement process at the housing development site where his property is located. He says despite contacting the Council in April 2024 about planning breaches concerning landscaping and the provision of Electic Vehicle Charging Points (EVCP), it has not taken formal enforcement action to address the breaches and should do so.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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)
3. 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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In September 2024 Mr X complained to the Council about the lack of progress in relation to planning breaches he had brought to the Council’s attention in April 2024 which concerned landscaping and the provision of EVCPs.
7. The Council acknowledged the updates Mr X had received may not have been as frequent as he would have liked but that it had an open and ongoing investigation into the breaches. It confirmed it had been in recent touch with the developers about the matters and explained that informal action through negotiation was often the most efficient way to resolve matters.
8. It advised Mr X that the developers had been given the opportunity to rectify the breaches, that it had maintained communication with them and that progress was being monitored. In response to my initial enquiry, the Council has also advised that the developers are currently preparing a pre planning application to try and resolve matters and that the application is expected shortly.
9. While Mr X may be disappointed with the time it is taking to resolve matters, it is not our role to act as a point of appeal against the Council’s decisions. We cannot question a council’s decisions if it has followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information.
10. The Council is not obliged to take enforcement action when a planning breach occurs and it has explained its approach to taking informal action initially. Even if we investigated, we cannot direct the Council to take formal enforcement action. This is a decision for the Council to make and there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman