Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of planning matters concerning a development site close to her home. We will not investigate the complaint because an investigation is unlikely to add to the investigation already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, says she did not receive an adequate response to her contact with the Council about planning breaches at a site close to her home. She says the s106 agreement attached to the development which requires the developers to provide serviced sites has not been properly followed as the required utilities infrastructure is not in place. This has caused her continued disturbance as work for the services has been undertaken by different builders and has resulted in much dust and noise.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. I gave Ms X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what she said.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained to the Council that it had not responded to her communications about planning issues affecting the development site close to her home. The Council acknowledged that it had provided a poor service. It apologised for this and confirmed the issues had been raised with the appropriate managers.
7. It confirmed retrospective planning applications had been required for work which did not conform to the submitted plans. It also explained the site owner had confirmed that all the required infrastructure services had been provided. In following up on this latter issue, the Council contacted Ms X again to update her on its further consideration of the matter. It said its legal officer had examined the s106 agreement and found the definition of a “serviced site” made reference “to the rear of each plot” and that while there had been a technical breach of the agreement with regard to the location of the utility connections, it would not be expedient to take enforcement action when the spirit of the s106 agreement had been met. It has confirmed that a further site visit will be carried out to check on progress and identify any outstanding issues.
8. As the outcome to her complaint, Ms X says she wants the developer to be made to stick to the s106 agreement with regard to the supply of all relevant services to the rear of each plot on site. However, the Council has considered what has been installed and decided, while there has been a technical breach, it is not expedient to take enforcement action., This is a decision it is entitled to take and the merits of it are not open to review by the Ombudsman.
9. The Council’s own investigation acknowledged that it had not responded properly to Ms X’s communication, and it apologised for this. However, we will not investigate this matter when we are not investigating the substantive issue.
10. If Ms X has a complaint about dust and noise from the site, she can report it to the Council’s Environmental Protection team for investigation.
11. In responding to my draft decision Ms X says there remain issues outstanding concerning an incorrect access point, the lack of scalable plans for the road widening by the developer and the lack of pipework for the infrastructure. However, matters are ongoing and the Council has confirmed it will be determining the planning applications, visiting the site and continuing to assess the situation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because an investigation is unlikely to add to the investigation already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman