Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s lack of enforcement relating to hours of operation at a construction site. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating part of the complaint, and no evidence of injustice caused to Mr X by the other part.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s lack of response to breaches of start and end time of construction works near his property. He says the Council has also not dealt with breaches of land contamination and drainage conditions, as well as dust. Mr X believes the Council has been biased and has not communicated appropriately with the public. The noise caused disruption to Mr X’s and his partner’s peace as keyworkers during the pandemic. This had a significant impact on their health and wellbeing. Mr X wants the Council’s planning department to be scrutinised and overhauled.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In March 2020, Mr X told the Council about a breach of planning conditions relating to the hours of operation at a construction site near his home.
7. In May 2020, the government issued a written statement on construction. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, councils were expected to approve requests to extend construction working hours unless there were very compelling reasons against this. This was to ensure safe working in line with social distancing guidelines.
8. The Council negotiated with the developer and gave it advice. This informal action resulted in some improvements and this was achieved much sooner than formal action could have achieved improvements in this case. The Council considered whether it was expedient to take formal enforcement action, but decided it was not. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
9. Mr X complained about the hours of operation from March 2020 to July 2021. The majority of this time period was covered by the government’s written statement. However, Mr X says breaches are still occurring. It is open to him to raise a new planning enforcement case with the Council now because current breaches would not be subject to this same guidance.
10. Mr X also complained to the Council about other issues, including contamination and drainage at the site. However, there is no evidence these issues have caused Mr X an injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating part of the complaint, and no evidence of injustice caused to Mr X by the other part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman