Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council will not take enforcement action against a neighbour for erecting a side structure which is causing damp to his property.

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, or
• 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 the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says that his neighbour erected a structure at the side of his house which has been constructed in a way that causes dampness to his house.
6. The Council investigated the structure and concluded that it did not need planning permission as it was Permitted Development.
7. Not all development needs planning permission from local planning authorities. Certain developments are deemed permitted, providing they fall within limits set within regulations. This type of development is known as ‘permitted development’.
8. The Council also considered whether any enforcement action should be taken for any breach of Building Control law. Again, the Council investigated and concluded that the building was classed as a covered yard or covered way, which meant that it was exempt from Building Control regulations.
9. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
10. I am satisfied that the Council properly considered the question of enforcement having had the benefit of the observations of a Planning Officer and evidence provided by Mr X.
11. In the absence of fault, we would not question that decision.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman