Planning


Recent reports in this category are shown below:

  • Surrey Heath Borough Council (24 017 624)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning advice 20-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s pre-planning application advice. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

  • South Norfolk District Council (25 012 545)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Building control 20-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council approving building works which the complainant says are defective. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have complained to us again sooner, and it is unlikely an investigation would achieve a worthwhile outcome for them.

  • West Northamptonshire Council (25 019 011)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 20-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to take enforcement action about a neighbour’s landscaping works. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

  • North West Leicestershire District Council (25 000 657)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 19-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of planning enforcement and other concerns for a development of homes. He said it had failed to hold the developer to account. We have not found fault in the process the Council followed to consider his concerns. While it has taken a substantial amount of time to commence or decide on any formal action against identified breaches, this was not due to unnecessary delay by the Council. There was some fault in the delayed complaints handling, which caused Mr X some frustration. The Council will apologise to acknowledge this.

  • Buckinghamshire Council (25 012 455)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 19-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about planning enforcement at a neighbouring property. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigation.

  • North Devon District Council (25 016 456)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 19-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and breaches of planning control. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

  • Durham County Council (25 014 264)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 16-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of their neighbour’s planning application. This is because the complaint is late and it would have been reasonable for them to complain about it sooner. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to address their concerns about their neighbour’s building work as we cannot say this caused the injustice they claim. We cannot therefore achieve any worthwhile outcome by investigating this issue further.

  • Hartlepool Borough Council (25 016 327)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 16-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault and the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

  • London Borough of Sutton (25 017 379)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 16-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

  • West Suffolk Council (25 022 712)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 16-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with two of Mr X’s planning applications. This is because Mr X has already used his legal rights to appeal to the Planning Inspector on the substantive matters, we have partly considered Mr X’s complaints already and it is not a good use of public funds to look at side issues in isolation from the substantive matters.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings