Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to take action regarding the poor state of his neighbour’s house and garden, due to disrepair and hoarding. We have not found evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains the Council has failed to properly consider the poor state of his neighbour’s house and garden and take action under section 215 of the Town and County Planning Act 1990. He says the Council’s failure is causing him stress and anxiety.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended).
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended).
5. Mr X complained regarding the Council’s lack of action from 2016. However, he made his complaint to the Ombudsman in January 2021. The complaint is late and Mr X has not given good reasons why he did not complain earlier. I have therefore investigated matters from May 2020, when he contacted the Council.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have discussed the complaint with the complainant and considered the complaint, correspondence and photos provided by the complainant. I have made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. Mr X and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr X contacted the Council about his neighbour’s house and garden in May 2020. He had complained in previous years regarding the same issues.
8. He stated there was rubbish in the rear garden, rats, windows in poor repair and that the house was an eyesore. He said rats were now entering his own home and another neighbour’s house. Mr X said the Council should send a pest control officer to deal with the rats.
9. He said the Council had failed to take action previously but should do so now as set out in the Town and County Planning Act Section 215 Guidance.
10. This guidance explains the powers that Councils have to take action to clean up land and buildings where its condition has an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring buildings. Councils can issue a notice under section 215 requiring an owner to take steps to remedy the situation. Councils can also carry out the work themselves and recover the costs from the owner.
11. The Council’s planning enforcement team replied that it would arrange a visit, but this may take some time due to Covid 19 restrictions. It asked for photos and explained that the remit of Local Planning Authorities is narrow in these circumstances because it related to the visual harm of the site rather than any internal hoarding or pest related nuisances.
12. Mr X sent several photos to the Council which he said showed the lack of progress in addressing the poor condition of the house and land. During June the Council confirmed it was liaising with another organisation regarding providing a skip. The Council’s environmental health team advised Mr X about the legislation it could consider in these circumstances. It said that if it did not have evidence the property was filthy or verminous it could not take action to clear the property. When the Council pest control officer visited there was not sufficient evidence of rats. The Council also advised that it did not consider the windows were a statutory nuisance according to the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
13. Mr X complained to the Council in July 2020 at stage one of its procedure. He explained the history of disrepair and hoarding. He said the Council should have made a coordinated multi agency response. In his view the problem had got worse due to failings by the Council. He said that the poor state of the garden and the house had affected other neighbours who had also complained. In his view the Council was wrong to say it could not use its power under section 215. He repeated his points regarding the Best Practice Guidance, and said it did not matter whether it was the front or the back of the house, but both the house and the land was in a poor state and materially affected his amenity. He said the Council should take account of the impact on his mental health.
14. The Council’s environmental control officer responded at stage one in July 2020. He said that his team had liaised with planning enforcement. He explained the Council’s powers under the Public Health Act 1936 to require cleansing of filthy, or verminous premises. In law, “filthy” meant excrement. A property could be subject to hoarding, but not meet the criteria for action under the Act. The Council said it was working with Mr X’s neighbour and making slow progress. This took time and was hindered by the Covid 19 situation. The Council acknowledged Mr X’s property was affected by the condition of his neighbour’s property. But it did not consider the case met the criteria for the legal action it had described.
15. The Council’s planning enforcement officer also responded at stage one regarding the Council’s planning enforcement powers under section 215. It said that the power was discretionary and therefore it was up to the Council to decide whether serving a notice would be appropriate in any particular case, considering all the local circumstances. The Council said there was a right of appeal against a notice and it must be satisfied that the amenity of an area is sufficiently affected to warrant taking action.
16. The Council said that while there had been delay due to Covid 19, it had visited the property. The Council attached photos of the front and rear of the property. It said that Mr X had referred to items within the sheds, but it considered these were contained and had little impact on amenity. In addition while Mr X had referred to how his neighbour might live within the house due to hoarding, the Council could not consider this as section 215 deals with visual amenity. The Council’s view was that the impact of the condition of the house and garden was not so severe that it warranted formal enforcement action at this time.
17. Mr X complained further that the Council had not responded to his points. He said the Council’s photos did not show the full extent of the rubbish in the garden. And the Council had not referred to the photos he had sent. He said the Council should consider the state of the land and buildings. He referred to the Best Practice Guidance which discussed a section 215 not being limited to the impact on the street scene, but that it could be served where those adversely affected were solely adjoining occupiers. Mr X also said the Council failed to respond regarding its lack of action since 2016.
18. The Council responded that having considered all the points Mr X raised and taking account of the Best Practice Guidance, its opinion remained that the state of the land and the building was not such that it warranted formal enforcement action. The Council considered the current state of the land and concluded that some improvements had been made and that the visual harm was not so great that it justified enforcement action. The Council noted Mr X’s comments about lack of action from 2016. But it said that Mr X should have raise a complaint then.
19. The Council provided evidence it has taken a coordinated approach in its response to our enquiries.

Analysis

20. Based on the information I have seen, I have not found fault by the Council in its consideration and decision not to take the action Mr X wants. The Council has explained its power to serve a section 215 is discretionary and it must consider the circumstances of each individual case. The Council has visited the property and it has referred to the legislation and Guidance. In my view the Council has taken account of relevant factors and made a decision which does not appear to have been affected by fault.
21. As I explain in paragraph 2, we cannot question whether the Council’s decision is right or wrong, if it is not affected by fault, if a complainant disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

22. I have not found fault by the Council, therefore I have completed my investigation and closed the complaint

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman