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. Ms X has complained about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control and its decision not to take enforcement action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 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 Ms 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. 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, I am satisfied the Council properly looked into Ms X’s concerns before deciding not to take enforcement action. An enforcement officer visited the site, and the Council initially said the structure required planning permission. However, following a second site visit the Council decided it had no grounds to take enforcement action. It said the structure could be moved at short notice, was within the curtilage of the dwelling house and used for purposes incidental to the main property. Therefore, the Council decided the structure did not constitute development and did not need planning permission.
7. Ms X says the structure should be taken down or moved to another part of her neighbour’s garden. But the Council has explained why it would not be expedient to take enforcement action even if it did agree the structure needed planning permission.
8. I understand Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide enforcement action was not necessary. Councils also do not need to take enforcement 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.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman