Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because the complainant has not suffered any significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. He says there have been long delays and the unauthorised development has a significant impact on the character and appearance of the area. Mr X says the Council should take formal 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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(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 Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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.
6. In this case, the Council looked into Mr X’s concerns and agreed there had been a breach of planning control. The Council said it intended to issue an enforcement notice. However, a notice was not served, and the Council says the matter is still under consideration.
7. Mr X says formal enforcement action should be taken. However, the Council does not need to take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control and the Council may still decide that it is not expedient to take formal action.
8. There have been some delays by the Council. The Council says the delays have occurred as it has had more urgent cases to deal with. However, I do not consider Mr X has suffered any significant injustice because of any delays. The Council has considered the impact of the unauthorised development and is satisfied there have been no issues since its construction, including highway and pedestrian safety concerns. The Council has accepted the development has a limited impact on visual amenity. But Mr X is not an immediate neighbour, and the development is not visible from his property. Therefore, I cannot say he has suffered any significant injustice as a result of any delays.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered any significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman