Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Hartlepool Borough Council (19 001 590)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 10-Sep-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's lack of enforcement action for breaches of planning control by his neighbour. The Council failed to properly record its ongoing consideration of the action it should take. However, this did not impact the overall outcome as the breaches were non-material and have been regularised. The protracted timescales involved in resolving this issue were not due to fault by the Council. It has agreed to issue a staff reminder about record-keeping.

  • Test Valley Borough Council (19 002 740)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 05-Sep-2019

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint which alleged the Council did not take prompt or proportionate planning enforcement action against a developer following 18 alleged breaches of planning control.

  • Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (18 017 142)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 04-Sep-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council installed a ramp at a neighbouring property without planning permission. This was fault by the Council. They also complained about the action the Council decided to take. We found there was no significant injustice caused by the original fault. The planning term took the view that the breach did not cause significant harm. We found no fault in the way the planning team decided not to take formal enforcement action.

  • Isle of Wight Council (17 018 065)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 04-Sep-2019

    Summary: There was delay by the Council in investigating a complaint about non-matching materials on the wall of a house extension. The Council has apologised and now properly decided not to take enforcement action after visiting the site and considering all the facts.

  • Arun District Council (17 018 009)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 27-Aug-2019

    Summary: We find fault in the Council's delay in starting a planning enforcement investigation on concerns raised by the complainant about a breach of working hours. However, the injustice of this was limited and the Council's apology was a suitable remedy. The Council otherwise acted without fault in its subsequent enforcement actions and in its environmental health investigations into possible noise nuisance from an industrial premises.

  • Herefordshire Council (19 000 931)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 27-Aug-2019

    Summary: Ms X complains the Council gave advice on the colour to paint a field shelter and then changed its mind after she painted it the requested colour. The Council has now confirmed the colour is acceptable. While the failure to properly communicate its decision to Ms X is fault, the situation is now resolved and no further action is required.

  • London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (18 015 963)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 27-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to take enforcement action in respect of a neighbouring business. The information provided shows there was a period of five months when the Council took no action. This is fault. External legal advice said the chances of a successful prosecution were very uncertain and so it is unlikely the outcome would have been different even if there was no delay. The Council should apologise to Mr X for its delay.

  • Amber Valley Borough Council (18 018 727)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 27-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr C complains the Council failed to investigate properly and take appropriate action in response to his reports about breaches of planning control and did not notify him about a reserved matters application. Mr C says his garden suffers from flooding as a result. The Ombudsman has found some fault by the Council for a delay in responding to Mr C and providing him with requested information. The Ombudsman considers the apology the Council has already provided Mr C is enough to remedy his injustice.

  • Sevenoaks District Council (19 000 684)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 21-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not take enforcement action against a breach of planning control which he says caused him to lose part of his garden. There was some fault in the way the Council made its enforcement decision, but it did not cause Mr X a significant injustice.

  • Chichester District Council (18 015 718)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 21-Aug-2019

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint which alleged that it failed to enforce conditions of a planning permission granted to the operator of an ice rink in a park close to the complainant's home.