Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control and a retrospective planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council. It is not yet possible to determine if the complainant has suffered significant injustice because of any fault with how the Council dealt with the retrospective planning application.

The complaint

1. Ms X has complained about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control and a retrospective planning application. Ms X says the unauthorised development has a significant impact on the area.

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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

4. Planning permission was granted for a development in the area where Ms X lives following an appeal to the Planning Inspector. The development has not been built in line with the approved plans. Ms X says the applicant deliberately concealed the changes to the plans and believes they always intended on carrying out the development built.
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. Councils do not need to take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control, and it is not unusual for councils to request a planning application to regularise a development. In this case, the Council investigated the breach, and the applicant made a retrospective application to amend the previously approved plans.
7. Ms X has raised many concerns about the retrospective application. However, the application is still pending. Therefore, it is not yet possible to say if Ms X has suffered any significant injustice because of any fault with how the Council has dealt with the application. Ms X can return to the Ombudsman and make a new complaint if she remains unhappy once the application is decided.
8. Ms X says the retrospective application should be referred to the Planning Inspector. However, it is for the Council as local planning authority, to determine planning applications, even in cases such as this where there have been previous planning appeals for the site.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council. It is not yet possible to determine if Ms X has suffered any significant injustice because of any fault with how the Council has dealt with a retrospective planning application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman