Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take enforcement action against a person living in their motorhome in a field opposite his house. We have discontinued our investigation because the person has moved the motorhome and there is nothing to be gained by further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to take enforcement action against a person living in their motorhome in a field (the Site) opposite his house. He said the problem had been ongoing for six years.
2. Mr X said the improper use of the land resulted in the police visiting regularly because of a civil dispute and affected the openness of the countryside. He wanted the Council to permanently evict the person living in the field.

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 further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

• I read Mr X’s complained to the Council and considered its response.
• I saw photographs of the Site and the Council’s case records.
• Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Planning enforcement

4. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. We expect councils to consider allegations and decide what, if any, investigation is necessary. If the council decides there is a breach of control, it must consider what harm is caused to the public before deciding how to react. Providing the council is aware of its powers and follows this process, it is free to make its own judgement on how or whether to act.
5. Government guidance says formal enforcement action should be the last resort and councils are encouraged to resolve issues through negotiation and dialogue.

Background

6. Since 2011, the Council had investigated six potential breaches of planning control at the Site. Those breaches included the use of land as a caravan site and material changes in use of the land, from agricultural to mixed use. The Council states it closed those investigations as it found no breach of planning control.

What happened

7. The Council issued an enforcement notice against the landowner in May 2019 for the siting of a motorhome for residential purposes. It also issued that notice to the owner of the motorhome, Mr M, and the landowner’s ex-partner. The Council said if they did not comply with the notice, the Council may prosecute or take remedial action. The landowner did not appeal that notice therefore it took effect as of June 2019.
8. The Council completed a site visit in September 2019- it has photographic evidence to demonstrate the motorhome was not there. It visited again in October 2019- the motorhome had returned.
9. The case records show there was correspondence between Mr X and the Council in March 2020 about the motorhome. In an email to Mr X the Council said there was debate about whether the notice had been complied with and whether to progress.
10. Mr X complained to the Council in August 2020 about its failure to take enforcement action and said Mr M continued living in the motorhome.
11. The case records show the Council visited the Site and spoke to Mr M in September 2020. Mr M said he did not live in the motorhome but would park it at the Site during the day. The Council contacted the landowner. They stated they had attempted to evict Mr M by switching off the electric and water. They said the field would be sold in the next two months and that should result in Mr M moving on.
12. Following those investigations, the Council issued its response to Mr X. It said it had issued the enforcement notice in September 2019 and that initially Mr M moved the motorhome. However, further complaints revealed the motorhome had returned and was being used for residential purposes. It said COVID-19 had restricted Council officers’ ability to complete site visits. In addition, a service restructure meant the officer investigating the case had a new role. It said it was still considering all options before deciding whether to progress to Court. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response and brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.

Events following Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman

13. Mr X contacted the Ombudsman and said that the field had sold so the problem with the motorhome was resolved.
14. That has been confirmed by the Council completed further site visits in November and December 2020. It stated the motorhome was not present.

My findings

15. As the motorhome is no-longer on the Site I have discontinued my investigation. That is because the outcome Mr X wanted has been achieved and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I have discontinued my investigation, as the motorhome Mr X wanted moving is no-longer on the Site.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman