Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Kettering Borough Council (18 007 913)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 16-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's failure to take enforcement action about breaches of planning control and planning permission. The Ombudsman will not investigate because the complaint is late and the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

  • Darlington Borough Council (18 001 956)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 14-Jan-2019

    Summary: Part of this complaint is outside jurisdiction as it relates to a complaint regarding windows the complainant has been aware of since 2010. The other part of this complaint relating to the lack of planning enforcement over a fence is not upheld. This is because there was no fault leading up to the final decision taken by the Council.

  • Cherwell District Council (17 015 715)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 14-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council dealt with her concerns about a neighbour's development and her subsequent complaint. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the way the Council handled her concerns.

  • Thurrock Council (18 006 529)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 11-Jan-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman does not find fault in the way the Council carried out planning enforcement action on an alleged breach of planning control for a building next to the complainant's property.

  • West Devon Borough Council (18 007 938)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 08-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr B complained about the way the Council carried out an enforcement investigation in 2017. We consider there was fault by the Council in failing to identify an earlier investigation which caused delay to the later investigation. But we do not consider it affected the outcome. The Council has apologised to Mr B for the delay which is sufficient.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (18 008 571)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 04-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council refused to take planning enforcement action against his neighbour. The Council found a breach of planning control, but there was no fault in the Council's decision not to take further action, because it decided the breach did not cause significant harm to the public.

  • Cheshire East Council (18 003 506)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 04-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains the Council failed to investigate properly his reports of planning breaches, nuisance and other issues at a nearby development site. Mr B says the developer disturbed contaminated land before a proper site investigation and remediation work which carries the risk of potential health impacts to his family. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Council.

  • London Borough of Croydon (17 018 113)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 21-Dec-2018

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to conduct neighbour notification for proposals received to develop a neighbouring property. Mr X also complains about the Council's subsequent handling of the planning applications received. The Ombudsman finds no evidence of procedural fault in the matters complained about and does not uphold the complaint.

  • Chiltern District Council (18 008 422)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 19-Dec-2018

    Summary: Mr X says the Council is at fault because it has failed to take action to enforce a condition attached to planning permission for a development near his home. The Ombudsman does not consider the Council is at fault in how it decided that it would not be expedient to take enforcement action and for this reason he has ended his consideration of this complaint.

  • Colchester Borough Council (18 010 088)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 18-Dec-2018

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint alleging it was slow to act on reports the complainant made of breaches of planning control at a neighbouring property.