Summary: Mr X complained the Council has failed to take planning enforcement against his neighbour. Mr X says that, because of this, it is failing to protect his amenity. There is no fault in the way the Council made its decisions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to take planning enforcement action against his neighbours. Mr X says that because of this, the Council has failed to protect his amenity from his neighbours who use their land for business purposes.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read the complaint and discussed it with Mr X. I read the Council’s response to the complaint and considered documents from its planning and enforcement files, including the plans and a Planning Inspector’s report.
6. I gave the Council and Mr X an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision and took account of the comments I received.

Back to top

What I found

Planning law and guidance

7. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies in the local development plan, unless other material planning considerations indicate they should not.
8. Planning considerations include things like:
• access to the highway;
• protection of ecological and heritage assets; and
• the impact on neighbouring amenity.
9. Planning considerations do not include things like:
• views over another’s land;
• the impact of development on property value; and
• private rights and interests in land.
10. Councils may impose planning conditions to make development acceptable in planning terms. Conditions should be necessary, enforceable and reasonable in all other regards.
11. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. When deciding whether to enforce, councils should consider the likely impact of harm to the public and whether they might grant approval if they were to receive an application for the development or use.
12. Planning applicants may appeal to the Planning Inspectorate in certain circumstances. Planning Inspectors act on behalf of the responsible Government minister. They may consider appeals about:

• delay by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission;
• a decision to refuse planning permission;
• conditions placed on planning permission; or
• a planning enforcement notice.

13. We have no powers to investigate decisions made by the Planning Inspectorate and would not normally investigate any matter it has decided.

What happened

14. Mr X’s neighbours own land behind their home, on which they run a business. The use was subject to planning permission, which included conditions restricting hours of use. Mr X had made complaints
15. They applied for planning permission to extend buildings and use the land more intensively. The Council refused the application and the neighbours appealed to the Planning Inspectorate.
16. A Planning Inspector allowed the appeal and imposed planning conditions, including those that relate to site drainage, hours of work and improving access to the highway. In the decision, the Inspector noted that there was no evidence that showed the approved and lawful use of the site would cause harm to nearby residents.
17. The Council has confirmed that works on the extension have not yet begun. It also provided evidence from its enforcement files relating to Mr X’s complaints. The files show the Council has:
• provided Mr X with out-of-hours contact numbers for planning enforcement officers; and
• visited the site to investigate Mr X’s allegations.
18. The Council’s enforcement officer has explained that planning conditions imposed by the Planning Inspector cannot be enforced until:
• work commences on the site; or
• the more intensive use of the site begins.
19. The Council’s enforcement files show no evidence that either of these events have occurred.

Time limits on investigations

20. The Ombudsman’s powers are subject to time limits. We do not normally investigate matters unless they are brought to our attention within 12 months from when events occurred, or the complainant could have known about them. We have discretion to go back beyond this limit but would need a good reason to do so.
21. We should not investigate late complaints or complaints that relate to matters that occurred long ago, unless:
• we are confident that there is a realistic prospect of reaching a sound, fair, and meaningful decision, and
• we are satisfied that the complainant could not reasonably be expected to have complained sooner.
22. However, we are not obliged to investigate all events that occur within the 12‑month time limit and generally we do not investigate events that happen after an individual complaint comes to us. But, we must use our discretion when applying our policy and our investigations should be proportionate to the particular circumstances of each complaint.
23. I did make an enquiry about the Council’s enforcement actions, but limited its scope from events after the beginning of 2019, not from 12 months before Mr X made his complaint to us. This was because the Planning Inspector’s decision late in 2019 made a significant difference to the enforcement environment in which the Council’s officers exercised their judgements. I also wanted to take account of actions following Mr X’s complaint to us, to check if there were any problems we ought to address.

My findings

24. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made.
25. The evidence I have seen so far shows that the Council has:
• investigated Mr X’s allegations;
• considered the evidence it found;
• considered its powers under the Town and Country Planning Act; and
• made decisions on how or whether to use its powers.
26. The Council has followed the process we would expect, and in these circumstances, I find no fault in the way it has acted.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I completed my investigation as there was no fault in the way the Council made its planning enforcement decisions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman