Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s enforcement investigation. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council investigated a breach of planning control. Mr X says there was a long delay before the Council decided not to take enforcement action against him. Mr X says he has incurred additional costs because of the Council’s delays as he had to stop work on the development and the cost of materials increased during this time. Mr X says the Council should compensate him.

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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(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. 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. In this case, the Council granted Mr X planning permission to build an outbuilding. After work started to build the development, the Council contacted Mr X about a possible breach of planning control.
6. Mr X acknowledged the development was not being built in line with the approved plans and an enforcement officer visited the site to consider the matter further. Following this visit, the Council decided not to take formal enforcement action in relation to the breach.
7. Mr X is unhappy with how long it took the Council to tell him it would not be taking further action. The Council has accepted there was a slight delay. However, I cannot say Mr X has been caused any significant injustice as a result. The Council needed to investigate the planning breach and the time between the site visit and the Council telling Mr X it would not take enforcement action was not significant. It was also Mr X’s decision to stop the building work during this time and the Council did not tell him he needed to.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not been caused significant injustice as a result of the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman