Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council’s planning enforcement team is harassing the complainant. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner and to use/have used the alternative remedy available to him. There is also not enough evidence of fault causing injustice in relation to the Council’s recent enforcement investigations.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says he has been harassed and intimidated by the Council’s planning enforcement officers over several years, and says this has affected his existing health conditions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We can 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.

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

4. We also 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)
5. And we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal, or could have appealed, to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister, and can consider appeals against a decision to refuse planning permission and/or a planning enforcement notice. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use, or have used, this right of appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b))
6. Finally, we have no power to investigate if someone has already used their right of appeal to the Planning Inspector. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included information about the enforcement history at the site and their associated correspondence.
8. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The restrictions detailed in paragraphs 4 to 6 above apply to much of Mr X’s complaint.
10. Firstly, I understand the Council started investigating alleged breaches of planning control at sites associated with Mr X in 2006. I consider it reasonable to expect Mr X to have contacted us sooner if he was concerned about the Council’s earlier enforcement investigations. So, the Ombudsman will not investigate any parts of Mr X’s complaint about events/matters he was aware of more than 12 months ago.
11. Furthermore, I consider it reasonable to expect Mr X to use, or have used, his right of appeal to the Planning Inspector where the Council’s investigations culminate(d) in the service of an enforcement notice or the refusal of a planning application. And where Mr X has already used this alternative remedy, the Ombudsman has no power to investigate any associated complaints, even if the appeal did not provide a remedy for all the injustice claimed.
12. Finally, I appreciate Mr X thinks the Council has continued to harass him more recently, including the service of a Planning Contravention Notice. But where an alleged breach of planning control is brought to the Council’s attention, it is entitled to investigate. I also note the Council has informed Mr X it intends to take no further action against him in relation to a two-storey property on the site. As such, I find there is not enough evidence of fault causing injustice to warrant the Ombudsman investigating these more recent events either.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner and to use/have used the alternative remedy available to him. There is also not enough evidence of fault causing injustice in relation to the Council’s recent enforcement investigations.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman