Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Authority’s planning actions regarding ‘Property A’ and the impact on their home which is a listed building. The complaint is made late, there is no reason to exercise discretion to investigate, and no injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complain the Authority, in 2011, granted a certificate of lawfulness to the occupants of a dwelling, ‘Property A’, which is within the boundary of their property. They say this changed the use from a holiday let to a permanent residence. They complain the Authority failed to take enforcement action between 1998 and 2011. They say a member of the Authority occupied ‘Property A’ full time contrary to a planning condition allowing only seasonal occupancy. Mr and Mrs X say the Authority has allowed a residential unit in open country contrary to policy. They say the Authority’s decisions have harmed the setting of their home which is a listed building. Unauthorised building work at ‘Property A’ has included the erection of a garage. An owner of ‘Property A’ erected chimneys contrary to the Authority’s specifications. Mr and Mrs X fear future development may harm their property.
2. Mr and Mrs X complain the Authority’s reply to their complaint of May 2018 failed to deal with the part of their complaint about ‘Property A’. They say the last communication was in June 2019. They say the Authority should review the history of this and similar cases so others do not experience such failings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered Mr and Mrs X’s information, comments, and reply to my draft decision statement. I have considered the complaint correspondence much of which is about their other planning complaint (reference 20 008 412).

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr and Mrs X say in the mid-1980’s the Authority granted planning permission for Property A to be converted to a holiday let. In 2011 the Authority granted the owner a certificate of lawful occupation as a permanent residence. Mr and Mrs X bought their home, a listed building, in 2012. They say it is close to Property A which is ‘visible from rooms at the front of the house and from many locations around the property’. They say the Authority harmed the historic boundary and setting of the listed building.
7. In late 2014, Mr and Mrs X started refurbishment work at their home. The project was completed some three years later and they moved back into their home in August 2017. They lived during the interim in a holiday let which they own. They say there is a planning condition on their holiday let requiring the Authority’s written consent before it can be separated or divorced from the main listed building. They contrast this position with what was allowed to happen at Property A.
8. In May 2018 Mr and Mrs X complained to the Authority which, in June, appointed an external investigator to review the enforcement action taken against them. The investigating officer did not consider the history of Property A relevant to the main complaints. On 7 November 2018 following receipt of the investigation report the Authority wrote to Mr and Mrs X. The letter advises they can complain to this office.
9. Mr and Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman in November and December 2020. They say they have complained late due to the covid crisis.
10. Mr and Mrs X say, replying to my draft decision, that it was only in April 2019 that they had it confirmed that a former member of the Authority lived at Property A. They complain late because they needed time for their family to recover from the Authority’s legal actions against them and to have the strength to open old wounds. They had to attend to their business and a relative’s health deteriorated from the winter of 2019. They say it took many months to write the complaint to the Authority. They want the Authority’s practice failings investigated to ensure they are not repeated. They are not claiming a direct injustice but believe the Authority has allowed harm to the integrity of their listed building. They say they are not complaining about a current breach of planning control.

Analysis

11. I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons:
12. The complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction being made after the permitted period of 12 months (see paragraph 4 above). This covers events which Mr and Mrs X knew about before November 2019 and the Authority’s reply to their complaint.
13. I will not exercise discretion to investigate because:
1. Mr and Mrs X could have complained sooner. They took two years to complain to this office following the Authority concluding the complaint which had included the occupation of ‘Property A’ for fourteen years and the certificate of lawfulness. The additional matter of the occupant being a member of the Authority was also known about some 18 months before we received a complaint. The reasons given explaining the late complaint are not sufficient.
2. There is no injustice. Mr and Mrs X knew, at the time they bought their home, that Property A was residential, its relation to the open country, and the proximity of the two buildings.
3. The Ombudsman will rarely investigate administrative fault in the absence of injustice. There is insufficient public interest to investigate having regard to the many years that have passed since the alleged fault.
14. There is no injustice in the last 12 months. Mr and Mrs X would need to report a breach of planning control to the Authority.

Back to top

Final decision

15. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Authority’s planning actions regarding ‘Property A’ and the impact on their home which is a listed building. The complaint is made late, there is no reason to exercise discretion to investigate, and no injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman