Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (24 019 468)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 26-Aug-2025

Summary: X complained that planning decisions made by the Council more than three decades ago are evidence that shows bias in favour of their neighbour. We will not investigate this complaint further, because the matters complained about occurred long before our 12-month time limit on investigations. There is no evidence that persuades us to use our discretion to go back beyond this limit.

Cotswold District Council (24 016 177)

Statement Upheld Enforcement 21-Aug-2025

Summary: Mr C complained about the Council’s handling of his planning and environmental control concerns regarding a neighbouring business, including anti-social behaviour. We found no fault in the process the Council followed to reach its views, and it did not cause unnecessary delays as the matters were progressed. Mr C did experience distress, and his residential amenity was impacted, but this was therefore not due to fault by the Council. However, there was some fault in its delayed complaints handling. The Council should apologise to acknowledge the uncertainty this caused Mr C.

Cumberland Council (25 002 955)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 20-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to act on reports of damage to a listed building and a failure to respond to the complaint. There is not enough evidence of personal injustice to justify an investigation. Also, we consider an investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

Watford Borough Council (25 003 476)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 20-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case and the subsequent complaints process. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision on the enforcement case, and the delay in reaching that decision does not, on balance, cause a significant enough injustice.

Leeds City Council (25 004 868)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 20-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council permitting the unauthorised removal of about 200 trees from land next to her property. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to investigate it now. Even if Mrs X’s complaint had not been late, we would not have investigated because there is not enough evidence of Council fault to have warranted investigation and we could not have achieved the outcome she seeks.

Dacorum Borough Council (25 005 255)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 20-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with possible breaches of planning control. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

Somerset Council (25 000 764)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 19-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against a developer for breaching planning control and the Hedgerow Regulations. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the process leading to the Council’s decision. Also, we consider Mr X has not suffered a significant personal injustice because of a failure to follow the complaints process which warrants our involvement.

Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council (25 004 357)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 19-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take enforcement action against a breach of planning control. The complaint is late and we have seen no reason why the complainant could not have come to us much sooner.

London Borough of Enfield (24 015 713)

Statement Upheld Enforcement 18-Aug-2025

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly investigate her complaints about breaches of planning conditions near her home. The Council accepted it had not properly investigated Miss X’s concerns or communicated with her. The Council then failed to carry out further action it said it would. These failures caused Miss X avoidable frustration, time and trouble, and some additional cost. The Council agreed to properly investigate Miss X’s concerns, apologise and pay her a financial remedy.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (24 021 107)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 18-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting planning permission for a residential development which the complainant says causes flooding on her property. It is unlikely we would find fault in the way the Council considered drainage issues during the planning application process, and we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome for the complainant.