Enforcement


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Croydon (18 009 467)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 15-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mrs X says the Council is at fault in its consideration of her reports of breaches of planning control at a site near her home. Based on the information available the Ombudsman has found some evidence of fault in the matters he has investigated. The Council has agreed to his recommendations and for this reason he has ended his investigation.

  • London Borough of Croydon (18 009 065)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 15-Mar-2019

    Summary: Ms X says the Council is at fault in its consideration of her reports of breaches of planning control at a site near her home. Based on the information available the Ombudsman has found some evidence of fault in the matters he has investigated. The Council has agreed to his recommendations and for this reason he has ended his investigation.

  • South Bucks District Council (18 009 115)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 13-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council wrongly reversed its decision to enforce a planning breach adjacent to her house. The Ombudsman finds the Council is at fault. The Council's poor communication led Mrs X to believe the Council was going to proceed with enforcement action. But it then decided against enforcing, while failing to properly address issues raised by Mrs X. Since issuing our draft decision, the Council has reviewed the case and decided enforcement is appropriate. Mrs X's dealings with the Council have cost her time, trouble and frustration. The Council accepts it failed to provide the service it expects and has agreed to make a payment to acknowledge this.

  • South Downs National Park Authority (18 007 595)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 11-Mar-2019

    Summary: Ms B complains the Authority failed to take enforcement action about her reports of possible breaches of planning control within the curtilage of a listed building. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Authority.

  • South Hams District Council (18 013 027)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 08-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs B no longer want to pursue this complaint to us about planning and building control matters concerning a development near their home. We have discontinued our investigation.

  • Chichester District Council (18 002 955)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 07-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mrs Y has complained about how the Council has dealt with her concerns about the unauthorised use of a site next to her home. The investigation should be discontinued. This is because her neighbour has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate and, until the outcome of the appeal is known, further investigation will not establish what injustice Mrs Y may have suffered.

  • East Hampshire District Council (18 004 315)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 07-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mrs X says the Council approved an application made by her neighbour for a certificate of lawful existing use with virtually no evidence. There was fault by the Council because of unreasonable delay in its planning enforcement investigation. However, the delay did not cause Ms X significant injustice.

  • Cheshire East Council (17 018 884)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 05-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr Q complains about the impact of a housing development. We uphold his complaint, finding the Council was inattentive when it allowed the developer to raise land levels next to the boundary of his home. This may have contributed to waterlogging along that boundary. We also consider it failed to consider adequately the developer's proposed solution. These matters have caused Mr Q distress including uncertainty. The Council has agreed a series of actions to remedy this injustice.

  • Luton Borough Council (18 011 247)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 04-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about the way the Council has undertaken enforcement action to deal with a breach of planning condition in relation to the siting of a crane near his property. He states the crane overlooks his property and the ongoing works and noise it causes spoils the enjoyment of his home and garden, and disturbs his work. The Ombudsman has found the Council was not at fault because it investigated Mr B's concerns in a timely manner and acted in line with the National Planning Policy Framework and its own Enforcement Policy.

  • Derby City Council (18 005 369)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 28-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's failure to take enforcement action against his neighbour's development. The Ombudsman has found some fault because there were periods of avoidable delay. The Council also said it was going to monitor the development and keep Mr X informed but did not do so. This caused Mr X to be both frustrated and uncertain. To remedy this fault, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X. But the Ombudsman has not found fault with the Council's decision not to take enforcement action.

;