Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about planning enforcement. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has refused to take enforcement action against a business premises near his home. He says this has caused distress and may affect the value of his property. He wants the Council to enforce its prior decision not to grant a certificate of lawful development and apologise to him for giving wrong advice and for poor customer service.

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), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Planning enforcement action is subject to statutory time limits. A council may not take planning enforcement action in the following circumstances:
• there was development on, over or under land without permission, no enforcement action may be taken after 4 years from the date of the breach;
• there was a change of use of a building to a use as a single dwelling house, no enforcement action may be taken after 4 years from the date of the breach; or
• for any other breach, no enforcement action may be taken after 10 years from the date of the breach.
6. It is possible to seek formal confirmation from councils that an existing development or use of land is lawful and so needs no planning permission. If the Council accepts the evidence provided, it can issue a certificate of lawful use to the applicant. This may happen where:
• the Council has already granted planning permission for the use or development;
• a development is ‘permitted development’ and so deemed acceptable because it complies with limits in regulations;
• the development was unlawful, but the time limit for enforcement action has now passed.
7. We expect councils to consider allegations about breaches of planning permissions and decide what, if any, investigation is necessary. When deciding whether to enforce, councils should consider the likely impact of harm to the public and whether they might grant approval if they were to receive an application for the development or use. Providing the council is aware of its powers and follows this process, it is free to make its own judgement on how or whether to act.
8. In 2021, the Council refused a planning application for a certificate of lawful development for a business premises near Mr X’s home.
9. In 2022, the business continued to operate. The Council investigated and considered whether to take enforcement action. It considered the evidence and decided that there was now sufficient evidence that the business had been operating for 10 years and so the time limit for enforcement action had passed.
10. It also decided that although the business did not have permission for illuminated signage, it was not expedient to enforce its removal. This was because the business owner had agreed not to illuminate the signage and monitoring visits had shown this was being complied with.
11. We should not investigate this complaint. The Council appropriately considered whether to take enforcement action against the business and its signage but decided to take no further action. It explained its reasoning to Mr X in its complaint response and apologised for providing incorrect advice in relation to one part of the complaint.
12. Mr X's dissatisfaction lies with the merits of the Council's decisions but, in the absence of fault, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the Council's decisions.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman