Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement matter. This is because Mr X has appealed against the Council’s enforcement notice to the Planning Inspectorate.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about planning enforcement action taken by the Council as a result of his builder building an outbuilding which breached the limits allowed under ‘permitted development’.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. We may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal but cannot investigate if the person has already appealed. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b))
3. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• a decision to refuse planning permission
• conditions placed on planning permission
• a planning enforcement notice.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint and assessed it in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1974 and our Assessment Code.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) allows certain development without the need for planning permission. This is known as ‘permitted development’. Permitted development rights are subject to limitations and exclusions, but when a proposal falls within the parameters of development allowed by the Order it will not require planning permission.
6. Mr X wished to build a new outbuilding in his garden but his builder breached the limits of permitted development, meaning the outbuilding was 30cm too tall. Mr X suggested raising the ground by 30cm to, in effect, reduce the height of the outbuilding. But the Council refused. It issued Mr X an enforcement notice in 2018 and Mr X appealed. The Planning Inspectorate considered Mr X’s appeal refused it. Mr X was therefore told he must demolish the outbuilding.
7. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of the matter and wants it to cover his costs which total more than £26,000. But the Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. Because Mr X has appealed against the Council’s enforcement notice we retain no jurisdiction to investigate any complaint about the Council’s actions in connection with, or having a bearing on, the enforcement case.
8. This means we cannot look at whether the Council should have allowed Mr X to raise the land level around the outbuilding or whether it should have taken a different approach to enforcement in his case. The Planning Inspectorate has confirmed Mr X has breached the limits of permitted development and that the Council’s enforcement notice, along with its requirements, are valid.
9. If Mr X wishes to recover his costs he may wish to seek legal advice about a claim against his builder. But we could not hold the Council responsible for the costs or recommend it reimburses Mr X for his losses.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman