Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the way the Council has dealt with a planning and enforcement matter. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault with the way the Council has made its decisions.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, complains the Council failed to take enforcement action when a builder built a neighbouring dwelling that was not in accordance with the approved plans. Mr B also complains the Council then accepted and approved a new planning application for the larger dwelling. Mr B complains the Council’s actions have affected his amenity, prolonged the build and meant he had a longer period of disruption at a time when he was recovering from major surgery.

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. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Mr B provided and I viewed the planning documents available on the Council’s website. I sent a draft decision to Mr B and invited comments before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B previously owned the land and applied for and received planning permission to build a single storey dwelling. The permission was granted by the Planning Inspector on appeal and the approved plans specified the dimensions of the approved dwelling.
6. Mr B then sold the land and a builder started to build the new dwelling. Mr B noted the dwelling was not being built in accordance with the approved plans and contacted the Council.
7. Local planning authorities (the Council) have a duty to investigate potential breaches of planning control and discretion on whether to take enforcement action, if it is expedient to do so, if a breach is identified.
8. As well as formal enforcement action, local planning authorities can pursue other options such as taking no action or inviting a retrospective planning application. In this case, the developer submitted a retrospective planning application for the amended design of the dwelling. The Council considered this application and its planning committee approved the amended plans.
9. While Mr B does not consider the Council has properly considered this matter, the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault with how the Council has made its decisions. This is because officers visited the site, viewed the largely complete dwelling and decided it was not expedient to take formal enforcement action. The builder made a retrospective planning application, and this was considered by officers and the planning committee. Before approving the application, consideration was given to the revised plans, the previously approved plans and the impact of the revised development on the street scene and the amenity of neighbours. The distances between the development site and neighbours was considered. The representations made by Mr B and other neighbours were also considered.
10. The Council has also explained that any covenants Mr B and the builder entered into regarding the size of the completed new dwelling are private matters and not material planning considerations. This is correct and Mr B would need to take legal advice if he wishes to pursue any action against the builder for a breach of the covenants.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault with the way the Council made its decisions.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman