Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council granting several annual licences to a business in his area to put tables and chairs on land near the premises. There is not enough significant personal injustice to Mr X caused by the matters complained of to warrant us investigating. We also cannot achieve the outcomes he seeks.

The complaint

1. Mr X lives in an area where a catering business has outside tables and chairs on land in front of its premises. He complains the Council granted then annually renewed a licence for the business to put its furniture on the land while knowing it was unlawful to do so, because it is common land.
2. Mr X says the increased revenue the business got because of the outside furniture distorted the area’s market, and competing businesses run by his friends have closed.
3. Mr X wants the Council to follow Planning Inspectorate advice and force the business to stop using the land until consent is achieved lawfully. He also wants the officer or officers concerned to be prosecuted.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Mr X, relevant online maps and images, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. It appears the Council and Mr X agree the land used by the business is Common Land, not Council-owned or managed land. This means the licences issued by officers have not provided the correct permission. A Council officer said to Mr X the business’s activity on the land may now be unenforceable because it has been in place for sufficient time to be exempt.
7. Even if there has been Council fault here, we will not investigate. We understand it is Mr X’s view the business gained an advantage from the outside seating which distorted the local market for other similar catering businesses and led to some of his friends’ premises closing. An investigation by us would not enable us to find the Council’s licencing decisions led directly to those businesses shutting down. There are many different reasons why enterprises close. Even if we could make that connection, his friends’ businesses closing is not a significant personal injustice to Mr X. That the business with the outside tables and chairs may have received a benefit here is not itself an injustice to Mr X. There is insufficient significant personal injustice to Mr X from the matters complained of to justify an investigation so we will not do so.
8. Mr X wants the Council to force the business to stop using the land until consent is achieved lawfully and for officers involved to be prosecuted. We cannot order councils to force businesses to make applications for other licences or planning permissions, or to use discretionary enforcement powers. We also cannot order councils to pursue prosecutions or other sanctions against their officers. We have no powers to order action to be taken by a council regarding an employee, as that would be an internal personnel matter. That we cannot achieve the outcomes Mr X seeks from his complaint is a further reason why we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
• there is insufficient significant personal injustice to him caused by the matters complained of to warrant us investigating; and
• we cannot achieve the outcomes he seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman