Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to scrutinise a planning application before granting planning permission. And in the way it responded to his reports of breaches of building regulations. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to fully scrutinise his neighbour’s planning application before granting permission. He says it failed to consider the Party Wall Act and failed to prosecute his neighbour.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council received a planning application from Mr X’s neighbour to build an extension and porch. It sent out notification letters to neighbours including Mr X.
6. Mr X’s neighbour decided to carry out internal work on his property which was not part of the planning application. He started these works without the Council’s knowledge and before Mr X received the letter about the planning application. The Council considered the objections received before deciding to grant planning permission.
7. Mr X complained the neighbour had removed the chimney breast causing damage to his property.
8. The Council visited the neighbour’s property the day Mr X reported his concerns. It confirms it liaised with the owner and arranged for the work to be completed safely. It also advised the owner the work required Building Regulations Approval. The neighbour has made the necessary application and the Council has made multiple site visits.
9. Mr X is concerned the Council did not consider the requirement of the Party Wall Act or the impact of the work on his home when it approved the planning application. However, it was for the neighbour to contact Mr X about the party wall issues. Also the Council is not responsible for repairing the damage to Mr X’s home. The damage and the party wall issues are civil matters between Mr X and his neighbour and are not for the Council to resolve.
10. Also, planning applications are not concerned with building regulations. They are two separate regimes and it is for the developer to ensure they apply for the necessary consents.
11. I understand Mr X is also concerned the Council has not taken legal action against his neighbour. However, it is for the Council to decide whether to prosecute for breaches of building control regulations. Its’ decision not to do so does not cause Mr X any injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen evidence of fault in the way it considered and approved the neighbour’s planning application. Nor have we seen any evidence of fault in the way it dealt with Mr X’s report that his neighbour had carried out dangerous work in their home.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman