Recent reports in this category are shown below:
-
Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (25 001 394)
Statement Not upheld Planning applications 04-Nov-2025
Summary: Mr X complained that wording used in a planning officer report from 2020 led to the removal of vegetation screening, affecting the privacy of his property. We ended our investigation into Mr X’s complaint because it is late and there are no good reasons to investigate now. Further, Mr X’s complaint concerns a proposed development that is not yet built, therefore, any injustice is speculative.
-
East Devon District Council (25 007 596)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 04-Nov-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application for a development near his home. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement. We also cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants.
-
Harborough District Council (25 008 489)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 04-Nov-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s enforcement decision on his neighbour’s hedges. This is because further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.
-
Statement Upheld Enforcement 03-Nov-2025
Summary: We found fault on Mr Y’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with his reports of a neighbouring business site breaching planning regulations. It could not provide copies of correspondence with the site. Nor did it show what it was doing for eight months in 2024. It failed to keep him updated at key stages. The Council agreed to send him a written apology, pay £150 for the injustice caused, remind relevant officers of the need to properly keep records, and to keep reporters updated at key moments of their investigation. It will ensure cases are progressed without delay, keep Mr Y updated about action on his reports, and review why there was a delay. There was no fault with its response to his reports of a statutory nuisance. It continues to consider its planning enforcement options.
-
Statement Upheld Planning applications 03-Nov-2025
Summary: We found some delay by the Council on Mrs Y’s complaint about its handling of her outline planning application. There was no outstanding injustice to her from the delay.
-
Cheshire East Council (24 022 523)
Statement Not upheld Planning applications 03-Nov-2025
Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council failed to notify them of planning applications and amended plans at a neighbouring property and failed to properly consider the impact on their residential amenity. The Council did carry out the correct notifications and considered the impact on Mr and Mrs X’s residential amenity before approving the applications.
-
Ashford Borough Council (25 008 368)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 03-Nov-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about delays in deciding a planning application. It would be reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.
-
Birmingham City Council (25 009 037)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 03-Nov-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement. This is because the complaint is late.
-
Birmingham City Council (25 006 664)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 31-Oct-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to manage a transit site for travellers. We consider further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.
-
Statement Not upheld Enforcement 30-Oct-2025
Summary: We have discontinued our investigation. The Council has acknowledged the impact of the unauthorised use of the site, offered a financial remedy and apology to Ms X, and confirmed its plans to relocate the operation within a reasonable timescale. We consider this represents a suitable remedy for the injustice caused, and further investigation is unlikely to lead to a significantly different outcome.