Westminster City Council (24 020 020)
Category : Planning > Building control
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 18 Mar 2025
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the wording on a building control notice. There are no good reasons the late complaint rule should not apply.
The complaint
- Mrs X complains about the wording on a building control notice issued in 2010.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mrs X which included the Council’s reply to her.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mrs X bought a property in 2016. She says the building control notice for the property showed a building control permission from 2010 to remove an internal wall. In 2022 she discovered the permission had only been granted with the requirement that doors needed to be in the place of the wall. She says the 2010 notice was incorrectly worded and should have been clearer. She says this has cost her £6000 to install the doors.
- Mrs X complained to the Council in December 2022. She had no reply and chased the Council in July 2024. It apologised for its delay in replying and offered her £100 for her time and trouble.
- Mrs X became aware of the notice wording issue in 2022. This is more than 12 months before she complained to us in February 2025. She has not consistently continued her complaint during the intervening period. There is a gap of more than 18 months. There are no good reasons for us to use our discretion and investigate this complaint known to Mrs X for more than 12 months.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there are no good reasons the late complaint rule should not apply.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman