Summary: A businessman complained that the Council had unreasonably decided not to sell him a development site despite having indicated throughout negotiations that his proposal would be acceptable. But we will not start an investigation of this complaint because the businessman has complained late about the matter in question.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr X, complained about the way the Council dealt with him regarding his attempted purchase of a development site which he wanted to use to build commercial premises. Mr X complained in particular that the Council led him to believe that his plans for the site were acceptable and that the sale would go ahead, but then changed its mind for no good reason.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. In particular the Act says we normally 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 has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Mr X provided about his complaint. I also gave Mr X the chance to comment on a draft of this decision before I reached final conclusions in his case.

Back to top

What I found

4. In 2014 Mr X started negotiations with the Council about buying a site earmarked for development where he wanted to build a commercial property, after the Council indicated it would consider a private sale of the land.
5. Mr X said the negotiations continued in a positive way into 2015 when a price was provisionally agreed and heads of terms for sale were drawn up. But later that year the Council changed its mind and decided Mr X’s proposals for the site were not acceptable under its planning policy.
6. Mr X said between 2015 and 2018 he and his agent had numerous meetings with the Council in an attempt to reach an agreement on purchasing the site, based on a revised proposal including commercial and residential elements. Mr X said that in 2017 the Council gave in principle approval for his new proposal. But the following year the council’s planning service confirmed it could not support the revised scheme for planning policy reasons.
7. In early 2021 Mr X complained to us about this matter. He felt the Council had not acted in good faith in its dealings with him, and its decision not to proceed with a private sale was made for political reasons. In the circumstances Mr X wanted the Council to now sell him the land, apologise and compensate him for his wasted costs in pursuing a deal.

Back to top

Analysis

8. However I do not see we should investigate Mr X’s complaint. In particular, I consider Mr X’s complaint is late and, therefore, we should not pursue his case. This is due to the usual restriction on us investigating complaints made more than 12 months after the complainant became aware of their issue with the Council.
9. I consider this restriction applies in Mr X’s case because it was clear by at least 2018 that the Council was not going to agree to a sale. But Mr X did not complain to us about this matter until January 2021.
10. I am also not convinced that there is any good reason for us to exercise discretion and investigate Mr X’s complaint, now despite it being late. In particular I do not see any reason why Mr X should not be expected to have complained to us earlier. In addition I suggest it is unlikely we could carry out a fair or meaningful investigation now about events that go back almost seven years.

Back to top

Final Decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with his proposals to buy a development site in order to build business premises. This is because his complaint has been made late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman