London Borough of Haringey (19 014 533)

Category : Planning > Enforcement

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 27 Mar 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because he is unlikely to find fault by the Council and the complainant could have appealed to the planning inspectorate.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. She says she did not receive the Council’s enforcement notice and has now lost her right to appeal to the planning inspectorate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. 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)

  1. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
  2. 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

  1. I have considered Mrs X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I invited Mrs X to comment on a draft of this decision and have considered her comments in response.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Planning authorities may take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission. It is for the Council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and what, if any, enforcement action is necessary. The local authority can serve an enforcement notice if it decides there has been a breach of planning control and it is expedient to take action. If the notice is later withdrawn, the council has the power to reissue the notice.

What happened

  1. In January 2019, the Council served Mrs X with an enforcement notice. The notice required the removal of a metal railing and wall built without planning permission. A few days later, the Council wrote to Mrs X and explained it was withdrawing the notice. Mrs X says this second letter was written by a senior officer and therefore she relied upon this information and took no further action in relation to the unauthorised development. Mrs X says she did not hear anything further from the Council until June 2019 when she received a letter of prosecution.
  2. The Council says that it withdrew the first notice because it contained an error. However, the enforcement notice was reissued shortly after this. Mrs X says she did not receive the second notice and argues the Council has provided no proof to show it was sent. Mrs X has now lost her right to appeal to the planning inspector and says the Council should withdraw the second enforcement notice.

Assessment

  1. I will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because it is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault by the Council. Mrs X could also have appealed to the planning inspector if she disagreed with the outcome of the Council’s enforcement investigation.
  2. Mrs X says a senior officer wrote to her to say the notice had been withdrawn and she did not need to remove the development. But I consider it clear from the Council’s letter that it was withdrawing the notice as it contained inaccurate information. The Council’s letter also does not say that the unauthorised structure can remain. The Council sent Mrs X a second enforcement notice the same day which included details of her right to appeal.
  3. I understand Mrs X disputes the Council sent the second enforcement notice and says it has not been able to provide any proof to show it was delivered. However, the notice was correctly addressed, and the Council was not required to send it by recorded delivery. Instead the enforcement notice was hand delivered to Mrs X’s home. While I cannot know why Mrs X did not receive the second enforcement notice, it is unlikely I could say the Council is at fault in this regard.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because he is unlikely to find fault by the Council and Mrs X could have appealed to the planning inspector.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings