Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take action over conditions on a licensed caravan site. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms X could not have complained to us sooner.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to take action against the site owner for breaches of licensing conditions for a caravan site where she has a holiday home. She says that she has been unable to enjoy her home for the past three years because of her concerns about the site. She says the Council should force the owner to replace the concrete base and compensate her for loss of use of her caravan.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X owns a caravan on a site where she uses it as a holiday home. Since 2018 she has been complaining to the Council about the condition of the site which she says is deteriorating causing swampy areas around her caravan. She also told the Council she was concerned about backfilled gravel workings which may causing the movement of the site.
7. The Council has told Ms X that most of the points which she has raised are outside its powers to take action under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960, which is the legislation relevant to a non-residential site. The Council told Ms X that most of the issues were private matters between her and the site owner or her own responsibility, such as preventing birds nesting in the roof area.
8. The only point which the Council could take licensing action over is the size of the concrete base which it accepts is undersized. The Council undertook a risk assessment of the location and decided not to use any enforcement powers because the size difference was not sufficiently significant and the bases could be replaced over time. The legislation gives councils powers to act over licence breaches but the use of the powers is at the council’s discretion.
9. Ms X did not raise the matter with us within the normal timescale of 12 months of becoming aware of the problems and reporting them to the Council. The time for receiving complaints is from when someone became aware of the matter they wish to complain about, not when they complained to the Council or it issued its final response. We would expect someone to complain to us within a year, even if they were dissatisfied with the time the complaints procedure was taking.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take action over conditions on a licensed caravan site. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms X could not have complained to us sooner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman