Conclusions

72. We found the Council was at fault because it failed to properly:

• consider the powers available to it to enforce the boundary screening it set as a planning condition in 2017, in good time;

• consider in good time the retrospective planning applications made in 2021;

• consider the various nuisances Ms X reported via its environmental health enforcement and statutory nuisance procedures;

• communicate with Ms X or respond properly to her complaint; and

• have due regard to Ms X’s human rights under The First Protocol, Article 1, which entitles her to peaceful enjoyment of her home and land.

73. Our view is the Council’s fault caused Ms X avoidable distress, and time and trouble. We also consider there remains uncertainty for Ms X about how things may have been different for her had the Council acted without fault, and this uncertainty caused her distress.

Print this page