Summary: The Ombudsman has discontinued his investigation of this complaint, about a number of planning matters, as it is made late. The Ombudsman will also not investigate the Council’s handling of a complaint as an independent matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, to whom I will refer as Mr W, says the Council has mishandled a number of planning matters. He also complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mr W’s correspondence with the Council.
5. I also sent a draft copy of this decision to each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. In January 2018, Mr W wrote a letter of complaint to the Council’s Chief Executive.
7. Mr W’s complaint was about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement investigation, related to the inconsiderate parking of a large vehicle near his property by his neighbours. Mr W said the Council had previously investigated a similar complaint, which had possibly achieved a resolution, but the problem had arisen again in June 2017. He said he had been seeking the Council’s intervention since then, but was dissatisfied with its handling of the matter.
8. Mr W also raised a complaint about the Council’s handling of a high hedge issue in 2015, and the enforcement of conditions attached to a planning permission granted by the Council in 2004.
9. A Council planning officer responded on 21 February. He explained the Council’s handling of Mr W’s complaint about the parking of the vehicle, and gave him contact details for a named officer whom he said would now be responsible for it. The officer responded to Mr W’s other points of complaint and did not uphold them.
10. On 1 March, Mr W submitted a second complaint. He reiterated his original complaint, and also said part of the complaint was about the officer who had responded on 21 February. Mr W questioned the appropriateness of this.
11. A more senior officer responded on 21 March. She did not uphold Mr W’s complaint, and directed him to the Ombudsman if he wished to pursue it further.
12. Mr W sent a further complaint on 23 March, to which the Council does not appear to have responded.
13. On 12 March 2019, Mr W referred his complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

14. As explained at paragraph 3, the Ombudsman will not generally accept complaints about matters which occurred more than 12 months before the complaint was raised. This is because long delays mean records are less likely to exist, officers’ recollection of events will no longer be reliable, and because it can be difficult or impossible to meaningfully remedy any injustice which may have occurred.
15. The Ombudsman has discretion to disapply this rule, where there are good reasons for the delay, and where there is reason to believe an effective investigation can still be undertaken.
16. However, I do not consider this applies here. Mr W’s main complaint is about a transient matter – the parking of a vehicle – and an investigation about an event which began two years ago is unlikely to produce a meaningful outcome now. This is also the case for the other issues raised by Mr W, which are four and fifteen years old respectively.
17. The Council’s Stage 2 response says Mr W was referred to the Ombudsman after a complaint he made in 2015 about the high hedges matter. So I am satisfied Mr W was aware of the Ombudsman’s existence by then at the latest.
18. I also note the Stage 2 response again refers Mr W to the Ombudsman, and yet he did not approach us until nearly another full year later. It is clear this complaint could have been made much sooner.
19. In his letter to the Ombudsman of 12 March 2019, the main points Mr W raises are about the Council’s investigation of his complaint. However, the Ombudsman does not investigate complaints about complaint handling where he is not investigating the substantive issue, as it is not considered a good use of public resources.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman