Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to take prompt and effective enforcement action to prevent the anti-social activities of a neighbouring business. We found the Council to be at fault because it allowed the case to drift and there was poor communication with Mr X. To remedy his frustration and distress, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and take action to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to take prompt and effective enforcement action against the operators of a neighbouring business to prevent its anti-social behaviour. This includes encroachment onto neighbouring land and operating during evenings and weekends.
2. Mr X says the business’s activities have affected the amenity of his tenants and made it more difficult to rent his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated events between August 2023 and January 2025. The latter date is when Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman. If Mr X remains dissatisfied with what happened after he brought his complaint to us, he should complain to the Council first.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and policy

Planning enforcement

8. Councils can take enforcement action if they find planning rules have been breached. However, councils should not take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
9. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. When deciding whether to enforce, councils should consider the likely impact of harm to the public and whether they might grant approval if they were to receive an application for the development or use.
10. Councils have a range of options for formal planning enforcement action available to them, including issuing a Breach of Condition Notice. This requires compliance with the terms of planning conditions already decided necessary for approval of the development.

Abandoned vehicles

11. The Refuse Disposal (Amenity) Act 1978 (the Act) says someone abandoning a vehicle on any land in the open air without authority is guilty of an offence and can be fined. The Act places a duty on councils to remove abandoned vehicles from land or roads in their area.
12. The decision on whether to classify a vehicle as being abandoned rests with the council.

Anti-social behaviour

13. Councils and the police can issue Community Protection Notices (CPN) under the Anti-social behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. The CPN’s are to prevent anti-social behaviour which is having a negative effect on the community's quality of life, and which they decide is unreasonable. CPNs require the behaviour to stop and, where appropriate, require the recipient to take reasonable steps to ensure it is not repeated. Failure to comply is an offence and may result in a fine or a fixed penalty notice.
14. Councils must issue a written warning in advance of the CPN. It is for the person issuing the written warning to decide how long is appropriate before serving a CPN. A CPN can be appealed in the Magistrates' Court within 21 days by the recipient if they disagree with the council’s decision.

What happened

15. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
16. Mr X owns two residential properties situated across the road from a car repair and body shop business (“the Business”). His mother lives in one property and he rents the other to tenants. There are also Council owed garages between Mr X’s properties and the Business. Both his mother and tenants have complained to him about anti-social behaviour and breaches of planning permission by the Business. According to Mr X, the Business:
1. trespasses onto Council-owned land;
2. operates outside permitted hours;
3. blocks access and the road with vehicles;
4. stores vehicles on the road without parking permits, removing number plates to prevent cars being fined;
5. drives at high speeds to and from the site; and
6. abuses and threatens tenants who complain.
17. Mr X says the activities of the Business create extra noise, pollution and cause highways safety concerns.
18. Mr X first reported his concerns to the Council’s planning enforcement team about the encroachment of the Business onto neighbouring land to the Council in August 2023. The Council’s initial response failed to address this issue. He was later told the encroachment issue and use of Council-owned land was the responsibility of a different department.
19. Mr X did not hear anything further. He submitted a complaint in June 2024. He also reported several abandoned vehicles remained on the road, despite being issued with highways violation notices. Ms X was again advised the Council’s estates department held responsibility for activity on council owned land. Mr X contacted the estates department directly. There is no record of him receiving a response.
20. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint July 2024. The Council explained that several Council departments/teams were involved in the case. They were:

• Planning Enforcement (failure to comply with planning consent conditions);
• Estates (encroachment onto Council owned land) and;
• Street Scene Enforcement (SSET) (encroachment into the highway).

21. The response also summarised the action taken by the Council.

• SSET had issued a Community Protection Warning regarding inconsiderate placement of vehicles. The Business had failed to comply and so a Community Protection Notice would be issued. This could lead to prosecution.
• It had issued abandoned vehicle notices. These could not be enforced because the Business “shuffled vehicles around”.

22. On the same day, Mr X also received a response from the assigned SSET officer (Officer J) stating no further enforcement action would be taken. Officer J explained part of the land being encroached upon was not owned by the Council. Nothing further would be done until the Estates department decided about how the land would be redeveloped.
23. Dissatisfied with these responses, Mr X lodged a stage two complaint in August 2024. He also told the Council the Business was regularly operating outside hours set out in it planning consent. In response, the Council said:

• officers would contact Business owner to remind him of the needs to comply with working hours set out in the planning consent. Failure to comply may lead to enforcement action;
• two CPN’s had been served on the Business by the SSET. Consideration would be given to proceed with a prosecution. Legal advice was being sought regarding a possible injunction to prevent reoccurrence. Mr X would be provided with regular updates;
• the SSET was considering what to do about the abandoned vehicles; and
• plans to redevelop the council owned land were still in progress.

24. Between September 2024 and January 2024, the Council took the following action to tackle the problem of abandoned vehicle and encroachment.

• It conducted several site visits.
• It took witness statements from Mr X and his mother with a view to a possible prosecution.
• It carried out enquiries of the DVLA to establish ownership of the abandoned vehicles.
• It had unsuccessfully sought cooperation from the Business owner and his staff.

25. In January 2025, disappointed with lack of tangible action, Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman. He said the Business continued to operate late into the night and was encroaching onto neighbouring land.
26. Since complaining to the Ombudsman, the Council confirmed it had issued a breach of condition notice about hours of operation in February 2025. It also provided a summary of taken by the Council’s SSET. This action is ongoing.

Analysis

27. Mr X first raised this matter with the Council’s planning enforcement team in August 2023. The case records show the Council officer (Officer B) ignored Mr X’s report of encroachment and responded to a different issue, raised my Mr X several months earlier. When this error was pointed out by Mr X, whilst the officer apologised for the misunderstanding and advised him that encroachment was the responsibility of a different Council department. Officer B’s email to Mr X stated he was “happy to refer the above to the estates team”. It is unclear to me (and I presume to Mr X) whether Officer B intended to make the referral himself of not.
28. I found the Council’s responses at this time to be unhelpful and below the standard of customer service expected by the Ombudsman. Mr X was clear about his area of concern, yet the Council provided an answer to a question that Mr X had not raised and then failed to refer the matter onto the correct department. This was fault.
29. There was further fault when Mr X contacted next Council in June 2024, because he was again only provided details of the Estates department, rather than a substantive response to the concern he had raised. The Council says the Estates department was copied into correspondence but there is no evidence any action was taken at this time. It was only when Mr X emailed again and made a formal complaint in July 2024 did the Council make any meaningful progress.
30. I also found the Council then gave confusing information about its intended actions. Mr X was told by Officer J that issuing a CPN was “the only action we can take against them”. But on the same day, in the Council’s complaint response, he was told a further CPN would be issued, and a consideration be given to a criminal prosecution. This possibility was repeated in the Council’s stage two response in September 2024.
31. Mr X heard nothing further until the following month when he was asked to provide a witness statement. This is the only record of contact being made with Mr X since the stage two complaint response, despite the Council’s commitment to providing him with regular updates. This is further fault.
32. Based on the summary of activity on the case between September 2024 and January 2024, I am satisfied the Council has been more proactive in its attempts to resolve Mr X’s concerns, included breach of planning control and encroachment.
33. The Ombudsman recognises this is not a straightforward matter because the Business has failed to co-operate on numerous occasions. I cannot say whether any enforcement action the Council may take in future will be successful or that it would have been successful had the matter been tackled by the Council sooner. But I am satisfied the case was allowed to drift in the earlier period I have investigated. This, together with its poor communication with Mr X has avoidably contributed towards his distress and frustration. This injustice requires a remedy (below).

Back to top

Agreed action

34. Within four weeks for the date of my final decision, I the Council has agreed to take the following action.
1. Apologise in writing to Mr X
2. Pay Mr X £250 as a symbolic payment in acknowledgement of his frustration and distress caused by the Council’s delay and poor communication.
3. Provide Mr X with a written update confirming the Council’s position regarding the Business’s activities.
4. By training or other means, take action to ensure relevant enforcement staff are aware of their responsibilities to involve other Council departments and update complaints when required.
35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

36. I find fault causing injustice. I made recommendation to the Council to remedy the personal injustice to Mr X and improve its service. The Council has agreed to action my recommendations, and on this basis I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman