Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (23 020 262)

Category : Planning > Enforcement

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 12 May 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to concerns raised by Mr X about the activities of a neighbour. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to take action against various activities by a neighbour concerning planning and highway matters. He says his neighbour can get away with flouting the rules and regulations while he has had obstacles put in his way in relation to his own planning application, so much so that he withdrew his application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X has complained to the Council about the activities of a neighbour in relation to planning and highway matters.
  2. The Council has addressed the concerns raised and explained that some of the activities complained about are regarded as a low priority for the Council. It is the Council’s role to determine an issue’s priority and not the Ombudsman.
  3. Mr X has compared his neighbour’s activities to his wish to receive planning permission for development at his own property. However, the two issues are separate. Mr X can apply for planning permission in the normal way and if permission is refused, he has appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings