Exeter City Council (21 011 035)
Category : Planning > Enforcement
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 06 Dec 2021
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council deciding not to take planning enforcement action in 2018. The complaint is late.
The complaint
- The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr B, has complained the Council decided in November 2018 it was not expedient to take enforcement action against a planning breach. He says he has suffered noise nuisance from the use of a site next to his home which does not have planning permission.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. It says 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. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr B and on the Council’s website. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Councils can take enforcement action if they find planning rules have been breached. However they should not do so just because there has been a breach of planning control. Government guidance says:
“Effective enforcement is important as a means of maintaining public confidence in the planning system. Enforcement action is discretionary, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control.” (National Planning Policy Framework July 2018, paragraph 58)
- In November 2018, Mr B complained to the Council a site next to his home was being used for a purpose not allowed under planning permission granted in 1997. The Council visited the site. While it considered there was a planning breach, it explained to Mr B it had decided it was not expedient to take enforcement action.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is late. He was aware of the Council’s decision nearly 3 years before he approached us. I have seen no reason the restriction I describe in paragraph 2 should not apply.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman