Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control. Mr X says a residential development near his home has not been built in line with the approved plans and the new houses are closer to his property than they should be. Mr X says the Council has failed to properly investigate his concerns and the matter has caused him significant stress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission or not complied with approved plans. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action. Government guidance stresses the importance of affective enforcement action to maintain public confidence in the planning system but says councils should act proportionately.
5. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body against enforcement decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
6. In this case, the Council looked into Mr X’s concerns about the possible planning breach. An enforcement officer visited the site and took measurements. However, the officer decided the development had been built largely in line with the approved plans and therefore the Council had no grounds on which to take enforcement action. The Council did acknowledge there was some dispute regarding the location of the site boundary. However, it said even if it agreed the development was not built in the correct location, its decision not to take formal enforcement action would be the same. It said the breach would be minimal and it did not consider that the location of the development would cause harm to Mr X’s amenity.
7. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement in this regard. Councils also do not need to take formal action just because there has been a breach of planning control. As the Council properly considered if it was necessary to take enforcement action, it is unlikely I could find fault.
8. I understand Mr X disputes the location of the site boundary shown on the approved plans. However, disputes about land ownership will be a private civil matter between the relevant landowners.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman