Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her and her husband’s reports of planning breaches by their neighbour. The Council has not ignored Mrs X’s concerns. The Council has now taken appropriate action to rectify its earlier erroneous decisions which sufficiently remedies any injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her reports of planning breaches by her neighbour. Mrs X says her neighbour has breached planning rules by living on the site without permission and has removed a significant portion of ancient hedgerow. Mrs X says her neighbour’s action has impacted on her and her husband’s amenity. She feels the Council has ignored her concerns and failed to take appropriate action. Mrs X believes her neighbour has misled the Council, which has led to it incorrectly deciding that the alleged planning breaches are immune from enforcement. Mrs X wants the Council to reconsider its decision and to take appropriate enforcement action to restore her amenity.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have spoken to Mrs X and her husband and considered the information they have provided in support of their concerns.
5. I have considered the information the Council has provided in response to my enquiries.
6. Mrs 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

Relevant guidance

Planning Enforcement

7. Councils can take enforcement action if they find planning rules have been breached. They have a duty to investigate complaints about breaches of planning control. If a breach is found, the Council’s next duty is to take a view on whether it needs to do something about it or not. The key issue is whether the alleged breach of control would unacceptably affect public amenity or the existing use of land or buildings meriting protection in the public interest.
8. Section 171A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 provides a breach of planning control as:

• the carrying out of development without the required planning permission; or,
• failing to comply with any condition or limitation subject to which a council has granted planning permission.

9. Enforcement action is discretionary and Government guidance says it should be proportionate. Addressing breaches of planning control without formal enforcement action can be the quickest and most cost-effective way of achieving a satisfactory outcome.
10. In deciding whether it is expedient to start enforcement action, the council can take account of several different factors including national and local planning policies, permitted development rights, whether the development is likely to be granted planning permission, and the need to achieve a balance between protecting amenity and permitting development which is acceptable.
11. A council may invite a retrospective application to regularise development which has already been undertaken. Councils must consider any such application in the normal way.

What happened

12. Mrs X and her husband (Mr X) live next door to a business owned by Mr Y. In November 2020, Mr X contacted the Council to raise concerns about Mr Y living on site, which Mr X believed to be a breach of planning permission. Mr X also raised concerns about the removal of a portion of hedgerow on the boundary of Mr Y’s business and the highway.
13. The Council undertook some enquiries following Mr X’s report in February 2021. This included contacting Mr Y and visiting the site. The Council considered Mr Y and his workers’ occupation of the site lawful based on evidence it had received at the time, which suggested Mr Y (and others) had been living on the site for a number of years.
14. In late April 2021, the Council’s Planning Enforcement Team advised Mr and Mrs X that it had decided Mr Y’s occupation of his business site was lawful. It also advised Mr and Mrs X that their concerns about the hedgerow had been referred to the County Council Highways Authority.
15. Throughout 2021, Mrs and Mr X continued to correspond with the Council about Mr Y’s occupation of his business premises and addition of a further caravan to the site. This culminated in Mr and Mrs X making complaints under stage one and two of the Council’s procedure in April and May 2022.
16. Mrs X brought her concerns to us in April 2022 as she remained unhappy with the Council’s handling and complaint responses.
17. In May 2022, the Council explained to Mr and Mrs X that it had revisited its decisions in respect of Mr Y’s case and concluded his residential occupation of his business premises to be a planning breach. It explained it would keep Mr and Mrs X updated on the progress of its enforcement case.
18. In response to our enquiries, the Council has advised us that it was inviting Mr Y to submit a retrospective planning application to regularise his occupation of the site. The Council advised it had also received Mr Y’s agreement to replant the portion of hedgerow that had previously been removed. The Council has again committed to keeping Mr and Mrs X updated on the progress of this action.

Analysis

19. While I understand Mr and Mrs X’s frustration, I also welcome the Council’s willingness to revisit its position in respect of the caravans and removed hedgerow in light of further information. The Council has sought to rectify its earlier faults and appears to now be taking appropriate enforcement action.
20. I have seen no evidence the Council ignored Mr and Mrs X’s earlier concerns. It was entitled to rely on the information it had at the time as much as it was entitled to alter its view when further evidence came to light.
21. The Council’s apology to Mr and Mrs X and its commitment to keep them informed of progress are the types of remedy we would normally recommend in these circumstances. As such, I will not be making any further recommendations in this case.

Back to top

Final decision

22. I have completed my investigation and uphold Mrs X’s complaints. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mrs X. I am satisfied the Council has already taken appropriate action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman