Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of an alleged breach of planning control in his neighbour’s garden. We have found no fault with the Council’s actions. It took quick and effective action to resolve the situation and followed correct procedures.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not properly consider an alleged breach of planning control in his neighbour’s garden. Mr X said the concrete pad still exceeds 5sqm despite Council intervention and he is experiencing a loss of privacy due to this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered Mr X’s complaint.
5. I have also considered the Council’s response to Mr X and to my enquiries.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

7. Councils can take enforcement action if they find planning rules have been breached. However, councils should not take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
8. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. 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.
9. As planning enforcement action is discretionary, councils may decide to take informal action or not to act at all. Informal action might include negotiating improvements, seeking an assurance or undertaking, or requesting submission of a planning application so they can formally consider the issues.
10. Government guidance says: “Effective enforcement is important as a means of maintaining public confidence in the planning system. Enforcement action is discretionary, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control.” (National Planning Policy Framework September 2023, paragraph 59)

What happened

11. In May 2023, Mr X contacted the Council’s housing department to complain about a concrete pad that his neighbour (a Council tenant) had laid in his garden. He said the pad is too large (larger than the 5sqm limit), too close to his fence (closer than 1m limit), causes drainage problems in his garden.
12. The Council visited the site and confirmed Mr X’s concerns. The Council said it would ask the neighbour to cut down the size of the concrete pad and install proper drainage. The Council also committed to assessing any resultant damage to Mr X’s property post-work completion.
13. A month later, Mr X contacted the Council for an update. The Council said it was trying to gain access to the garden to inspect the site and discuss the matter with the neighbour. Mr X then contacted the Council to inform it that works were underway. The neighbour confirmed to the Council that the work was complete and sent photographs to support this. The Council believed the work now complied with building regulations and made plans to visit Mr X to assess any damage to his property.
14. A few days after the work was completed Mr X contacted the Council. He said there were still outstanding issues including the closeness of some sections of the pad to his fence, the size of the pad still exceeding the 5sqm limit and doubts around the adequacy of the drainage.
15. In June, Mr X complained to the Council about its handling of his concerns about the works in the neighbour’s garden. The Council agreed to work with Mr X’s neighbour to resolve the issue. During July, the Council was in regular contact with Mr X and his neighbour and met both parties at the site. Still dissatisfied with the Council’s actions, Mr X escalated his complaint to stage 2.
16. The Council responded to Mr X and set out the work that it had asked the neighbour to complete. Mr X raised issues about the increase in levels of his neighbour’s garden, impacting of his privacy. By the end of August, the neighbour contacted the Council to address Mr X’s concerns that the garden level had been raised.
17. The Council determined that the garden level did not impact on Mr X’s privacy nor had the work damaged Mr X’s property.

My findings

18. I cannot question the Council’s decision to permit the work carried out by Mr X’s neighbour if I am satisfied the decision was reached correctly.
19. The Council acted quickly when Mr X raised concerns about his neighbour’s garden. The Council spoke to the neighbour who then reduced the size of the pad and proximity to Mr X’s property. When Mr X was still unhappy, the Council took further action and worked with the neighbour to ensure the works satisfied permitted development limits. The Council visited the site on more than one occasion and kept Mr X updated on the situation.
20. I am satisfied the Council followed correct procedures when responding to Mr X’s concerns. Mr X remains unhappy with the works, but I have found no fault with the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I have completed my investigation. I have found no fault with how the Council handled Mr X’s report of an alleged breach of planning control in his neighbour’s garden.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman