Local Government Ombudsman

> | Accessiblity Options | Text Only | Text Size: A+ A- Reset | Links | Site Map

You are here: Home : : Complaint outcomes : : Planning : : Planning archive 2005-06 : : Bradford City C (04C08279)

Quality and efficiency

Browser support

Browse aloud

Click here for speech assisted browser support

Downloads

Site tools

Files with this symbol pdf icon are in .pdf format. To view these files you will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader software. It can be downloaded below free of charge. Click To Download

adobe acrobat reader

Bradford City C (04C08279)

Planning enforcement                 Maladministration causing injustice

23 January 2006

‘Mr Howard’ (not his real name for legal reasons) complained that the Council failed to enforce conditions attached to planning permission for development on land adjacent to his home. Mr Howard complained that the developer has constructed walls (one retaining wall and one boundary wall), one on top of the other, to a height of 2.7 metres, and this has had an overbearing impact upon his property and left his home and garden without proper privacy.

The Ombudsman found clear evidence that the Council had failed to take properly into account the likely impact of the proposed development upon the residential amenity of near neighbours. This development site is steeply sloping and uneven. The Council, having been criticised by the Ombudsman for similar failings previously, had issued instructions to officers to seek information on ground levels, spot heights and other key measurements whenever they are relevant to planning applications. The Council failed in this case to obtain such necessary, detailed information before approving this application. The Ombudsman concluded that this was maladministration.

The Ombudsman was aware that the Council had taken steps that could lead to enforcement action against the developer. In response the developer had submitted a new planning application to regularise what is accepted to be unauthorised development. The Ombudsman did not seek to influence that process in any way. However, in view of the maladministration, the Council ought to take what action it can to put Mr Howard back in to the position he would have been in but for its maladministration.

To remedy the injustice, the Ombudsman recommends that the Council should:
• acknowledge the delay between Mr Howard bringing his concerns to its attention and the time that the situation is, as far as possible, rectified, by paying him £50 for every month between July 2004 and, either the date of the Council’s decision on the new application if that is approved, or the date that action is taken to rectify the situation in accordance with enforcement decisions;
• ensure that, in reaching a decision on enforcement action, it takes into account its maladministration and the injustice caused to Mr Howard and his neighbours and considers what it can do, as far as is physically possible, to place him in the position he would have been in had there been no maladministration;
• review the inconsistency in the decisions made by officers to refuse and then approve applications on this site, and ensure that procedures are in place to enforce the Council’s policies; and
• ensure that the appropriate committee monitors progress of any enforcement action at regular intervals and that affected residents are informed directly of progress.

Date Published: 26/02/10