Stroud District Council (23 004 359)
Category : Planning > Enforcement
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 02 Oct 2023
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to act on a report of a breach of planning control. We do not consider that an investigation will lead to a different outcome
The complaint
- The complainant, I shall call Mrs X, complains the Council failed to act on her reports of a breach of planning control. She says access to her home by emergency services is restricted by the breach of planning control. Mrs X wants this access restored.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:
- any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
- further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the Mrs X and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- The Council has notified Mrs X that its enforcement case is now closed.
- It confirms it has measured the position of the wall on site and there is no breach of planning control.
- The Fire Service has confirmed to the Council it can access Mrs X’s property in the event of an emergency.
- I acknowledge the Council has taken more than a year to issue a final report on the matter. However, I do not consider this alone has caused enough injustice to Mrs X to justify an investigation.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because further investigation will not lead to a different outcome. And the time taken to make a final decision on the case did not cause sufficient personal injustice to warrant our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman