Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council allowed a builder to use a skip, blocking the road, to remove building waste from near his home. The Council has not caused Mr X an injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council allowed a builder to place a skip on the road near his home to remove building waste from a development. He says the Council ignored its own planning condition requiring the skip to be located elsewhere, failed to consult, or communicate properly with neighbours and there was no licence for street works. Mr X says the Council’s enforcement team was ‘dismissive’ of his concerns. The skip was placed on a narrow road outside the development. Mr X says the Council caused him time, trouble, and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered Mr X’s comments, information, photograph, and reply to my draft decision statement. I have considered internet street scene views of the area. I have considered the Council’s complaint correspondence with Mr X. This complaint is linked to our decision on the Council’s consideration of the planning application (20008653).

Back to top

What I found

4. In late 2020, the Council granted planning permission for a development converting a property into two dwellings. The development is near Mr X’s home situated on the same narrow road.
5. The Council’s planning condition 5 requires the developer to obtain the Council’s written agreement covering such matters as loading, offloading, and parking. The Council agreed a skip should be located at the end of the narrow road in an open area. It told the developer a street works licence would be required. It accepted off-loading at the site would cause temporary blocking of the road. The developer’s plan says after a few weeks there should be minimal site waste to remove.
6. On 16 October 2020, the Council’s enforcement officer emailed Mr X and informed him that planning had agreed with the developer that a skip could be used to load and move waste. This was not a breach of the planning condition as long as the skip was not left on the road for a longer time. The Council later said it did not consider the planning condition breached or that there was significant harm to Mr X.
7. On 5 November 2020, Mr X complained to the Council saying the builder was using a skip lorry to drop the skip on the road, fill the skip with waste, and remove it, ‘all within approximately 30 minutes’. He says it has happened 4 times.
8. Mr X tells me he is concerned about how the Council deals with changes to planning conditions and that it did not communicate with him. He says the skip issue was ‘annoying’. His photograph does not suggest he would have been blocked in by the skip.

Analysis

9. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint for the following reasons:
10. The Ombudsman investigates fault causing injustice. There is no evidence of injustice. The Council would need to facilitate the developer removing building waste and this would likely cause some inconvenience on a narrow road. The use of the skip was for short periods. Mr X has not claimed or demonstrated significant harm to him. The Council explained its position to Mr X once he raised the issue and replied in detail to his complaints.
11. It is not a good use of limited public resources to investigate the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council allowed a builder to use a skip, blocking the road, to remove building waste from near his home. The Council has not caused Mr X an injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman