Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with possible breaches of planning control. This is because it is unlikely he will find fault by the Council and the complainant has not been caused significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, complains about how the Council investigated suspected breaches of planning control. She says the Council has been vindictive in its pursuit of her and its officers have been unhelpful.
2. Ms X also complains that the Council sought to breach the Data Protection Act and give her information to a third party.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the complaint and the Council’s responses. I invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision and I have considered the comments she has made in response.

Back to top

What I found

5. 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 carried out development without the required 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.
6. The Ombudsman would expect the local planning authority to carry out a proportionate investigation when there is a suspected breach of planning control.

What happened

7. The Council contacted Ms X in relation to a possible breach of planning control as it believed she may have erected external signs outside her business premises without the necessary consent. The Council started an enforcement investigation and found that there had been a breach of planning control as the signs at the front and side of the building required consent. However, the Council decided it would not be expedient to take formal enforcement action as Ms X had provided photographs to show that similar signs had been in place for many years. The Council also decided the sign at the side of the building would not materially harm visual amenity or public safety.
8. During a visit to the site, officers noticed additional movable signs which also did not have the necessary consent. The Council looked into the matter further and Ms X again provided additional evidence to show that similar signs had been in place for some time. Therefore, the Council decided not to take any further action in this regard and the enforcement case was closed.
9. Ms X has complained about how the Council carried out its enforcement investigations. She says the investigations were vindictive and the enforcement officers were intimidating and unhelpful. Ms X says the Council should not have investigated the second alleged breach as it already had information to show that similar signs had been in place for many years.
10. Ms X has also complained about how the Council handled her complaint and how it dealt with her personal data. The Council contacted Ms X to ask for permission to send a copy of the photographs she provided to a third party. Ms X refused permission and the Council did not release the photographs. However, Ms X is unhappy the Council would not give her assurances that it would not give third parties any of the evidence she provides in the future.

Assessment

11. I will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s enforcement investigation as it is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault.
12. Ms X says the Council has pursued her unfairly and should not have investigated the second alleged breach as it already had information from its first investigation to show that the signs had been in place for many years. Although the second enforcement investigation was similar to the first, it related to separate signs at the property. While I understand Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision to look into the second suspected breach, it is unlikely I could say it was fault for the Council to investigate concerns about possible planning breaches. In any event, even if it could be said that the Council should not have carried out the second enforcement investigation, I cannot say Ms X suffered any significant injustice as the Council decided not to take further action in this regard.
13. Ms X has complained about the behaviour of the enforcement officers and says she has been caused considerable stress by the matter. However, the Council did need to contact Ms X in relation to the suspected breaches and I have not seen any evidence to show officers were unprofessional in their correspondence with Ms X. I understand Ms X is also unhappy with how the Council dealt with her complaint. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor issues such as complaint handling.
14. Ms X has also complained about how the Council dealt with her personal information. The Ombudsman will not investigate this issue. Ms X can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office if she is concerned about how the Council handles personal data as this is the appropriate body to consider complaints about this matter.

Back to top

Final decision

15. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because he is unlikely to find fault by the Council and Ms X has not been caused any significant injustice. The Ombudsman also will not investigate Ms X’s concerns about how the Council dealt with her personal information and possible data breaches as there is another body better placed to deal with concerns about these matters.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman