Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed dealing with his planning enforcement complaint, putting him to time and trouble and causing distress. We found the Council at fault for delay. We recommended it apologise to Mr X, pay him £100 for time and trouble, pay him £100 for distress and, investigate his complaint. Further, that it take action to prevent recurrence.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s delay in dealing with his planning enforcement complaint. He says he has spent time chasing the Council and suffered avoidable distress.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
4. 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

5. I spoke to Mr X and I reviewed documents provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I gave Mr X and the Council an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law

7. Planning enforcement action is discretionary. A council does not have to carry out enforcement action simply because the public wants or expects it to.

Council’s enforcement policy

8. This explains the Council needs as much information as possible to carry out its investigations and to help keep complainants informed.
9. Complainants must fill out a formal Planning Enforcement form which includes:
• their name, address and telephone number.
• details of the complaint itself including when the problems started.
• the location of the issue.
• the name and address of the alleged contravenor, if known.
• an explanation of the difficulties the problem is causing.
10. The Council’s policy says it will acknowledge all complaints within 5 working days of receipt. It will then visit the site to investigate within 15 working days. For high priority complaints this will be within 5 working days of receipt.
11. The Council resolves (i.e. closing or deciding to take action) 80% of enforcement complaints within 8 weeks of receipt.
12. It will notify all parties of its decision (whether or not to enforce) within 10 working days of deciding. This will also include providing a reason for the Council’s decision.

Complaint policy

13. The Council’s complaints policy is not published on its website.

Principles of good administrative practice

14. In 2018 the Ombudsman published a guidance document setting out the standards we expect from bodies in jurisdiction. This includes:
• Keeping to commitments, including any published service standards
• Explaining and responding to any delays proactively
• Being open and clear about policies and procedures and ensuring information, and any advice provided, is clear, accurate and complete
• Stating the criteria for decision making and giving reasons for decisions
• Keeping proper and appropriate records
• Ensuring people can access services easily, including those needing reasonable adjustments.

What happened

15. In July 2021 Mr X made a planning enforcement complaint using the Council’s required form. He provided all details requested on the form in addition to his email address and photo evidence in support. His complained his neighbour had put up a fence limiting access to a local park and making it harder for cars to turn, risking the safety of those nearby.
16. Mr X says he chased the Council for a response and then received an acknowledgement three days later than the published timescale.
17. Mr X says he continued to chase the Council but received no reply or update on its investigation.
18. In October 2021 Mr X complained to the Council that its officer had not responded to his contact or kept him updated on the investigation.
19. In February 2022 the Council upheld Mr X’s complaint. The Council:
• apologised;
• said it would train staff on its complaints process and train the officer on its code of conduct; and
• agreed to review Mr X’s July 2021 request and respond in 10 days.
20. In May 2022 Mr X contacted the Ombudsman as he had not heard further from the Council. The Ombudsman contacted the Council which said it was considering the complaint at stage 2 of its complaints process.
21. In June the Ombudsman chased the Council for an update. We received no reply and so decided to investigate.
22. In July 2022 the Council wrote further to Mr X. In summary the Council:
• Apologised for its delayed response;
• Explained it had tried calling Mr X but been unable to reach him;
• Accepted it had not completed actions agreed at stage 1;
• Explained officers had tried to call him to clarify his July 2021 request but could not reach him. However, accepted it should also have tried by email and would do this in future.
• It needed to speak to him to fully understand the issue before responding.
• It understood he had these conversations with previous officers, but as they were no longer working on this issue, or had left the Council, it was unable to fully address the issue with the written information it held.
23. The Council also updated the Ombudsman in July. It explained it had experienced staff shortages which impacted response times. It had since increased recruitment and addressed current vacancies with additional interim support. It said it had apologised to Mr X for the issue and delays in communications. However, it could not update on its investigation until it had spoken to Mr X.
24. Mr X responded to the Council in July to say he had tried to contact it by phone to no avail and asking the Council to confirm a time for a phone call.
25. When I spoke to Mr X he said he had not heard further from the Council.

Findings

26. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman before completing the Council’s complaints process. We therefore gave the Council opportunity to complete this, however it did not do so in a reasonable time. We therefore considered it appropriate to proceed with an investigation.
27. The Council has taken no action on Mr X’s planning enforcement complaint since July 2021. This is fault. I am satisfied Mr X has suffered avoidable time and trouble chasing the Council and contacting the Ombudsman as a result. This is injustice.
28. The Council delayed providing a stage 1 complaint response, failed to complete actions agreed at stage 1 and then delayed addressing the complaint at stage 2. This is fault. Mr X has suffered avoidable distress and uncertainty waiting for the Council to resolve his complaint. This is injustice.
29. The Council says it cannot and could not proceed with its enforcement investigation without first speaking to Mr X. I do not accept this to be the case or a good reason for its delay. This is because Mr X provided information in full on the Council’s planning enforcement form; the Council says he has already had a conversation with its officers, therefore the Council should have kept a written record of any important information; the Council has not said what further information it needs to proceed and why; and because the Council has had chance to request this by email since July 2021 but has not done so. We expect councils to be accessible to complainants; not limit a person to contact by phone.
30. I acknowledge the Council has had staffing issues that it is now addressing. However, that does not excuse the delay or poor communication. It appears a lack of oversight of complaint outcomes is also an issue. And I note the Council has not met our expectations in publishing a copy of its complaints policy. I will therefore make service improvement recommendations to prevent injustice to others.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. To remedy the injustice set out above I recommend the Council carry out the following actions:
32. Within one month:
• Provide a further apology to Mr X;
• Pay Mr X £100 for time and trouble:
• Pay Mr X £100 for distress and uncertainty;
• Progress its investigation into Mr X’s planning enforcement complaint. If the Council still considers it requires further information from Mr X to do so, it should write to him specifying the information needed and explaining why this is needed to progress.
33. Within three months;
• Ensure it has a process in place to inform planning enforcement complainants of any significant delays in casework, to manage expectations;
• Ensure it has a process in place to monitor service complaint outcomes; that is to ensure agreed actions are completed;
• Publish its complaints policy on its website.
34. The Council has accepted my recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I found the Council at fault for its delay in dealing with Mr X’s planning enforcement complaint. The Council has accepted my recommendations and I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman