Summary: X complained about the Council’s decision not to take further enforcement action. We ended our investigation as it was unlikely to result in a finding of fault, a remedy for X or any other meaningful outcome.

The complaint

1. The person that complained to us will be referred to as X.
2. X complained about the Council’s decision not to continue its enforcement action against other residents.
3. X is not directly affected but is concerned about the impact these and similar developments have on the conservation area. X would like hedges that were removed to be replanted.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 alleged fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read the complaint and discussed it with X. I read the Council’s response to the complaint and considered documents from its planning files, including the plans and the case officer’s report.
6. I gave the Council and X an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Planning enforcement powers

7. Councils have a range of options for formal planning enforcement action available to them, including:
• Planning Contravention Notices – to require information from the owner or occupier of land and provide an opportunity to rectify the alleged breach.
• Planning Enforcement Notices – where there is evidence of a breach, to identify it and require action to remedy it.
• Stop Notices - to prohibit activities without further delay where it is essential to safeguard the public.
• Breach of Condition Notices – to require compliance with the terms of planning conditions already determined necessary for approval of the development.
• Injunctions – by application to the High Court or County Court, the Council may seek an order to restrain an actual or expected breach of planning control.
8. However, 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.

Conservation areas

9. Councils have the power to create Conservation Areas. These are areas considered to have special architectural or historic interest that should be preserved or enhanced.
10. Though Conservation Areas must be given special attention, planning guidance and policy should not be treated as if it creates a binding rule that must be followed. Councils must take account their policy along with other material planning considerations.

What happened

11. X lives opposite a site that is in a Conservation Area. X is complaining about two sites in the area. One of the sites is opposite X’s home and the other is a short distance along the road on which X lives.
12. The Council found a breach of planning control and served an enforcement notice on one of the sites. The owner took some steps in response, and the Council decided to end its enforcement action. In doing so, it considered the precedent set by development on the other site X complains about.

My findings

13. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made. We look for evidence of fault causing a significant injustice to the individual complainant.
14. Before we begin or continue our investigations, we consider two, linked questions, which are:
• Is it likely there was fault?
• Is it likely any fault caused a significant injustice?
15. If at any point during our involvement with a complaint, we are satisfied the answer to either question is no, we may decide:
• not to investigate; or
• to end an investigation we have already started.
16. I should not investigate this complaint further, and my reasons are as follows:
• Before it made its enforcement decision, the Council considered the allegation, its enforcement powers, the circumstances on site and other material considerations, including the degree of harm caused to the public. This is the enforcement decision-making process we expect, and so further investigation is unlikely to result in a finding of fault.
• X is not directly affected by the developments and is not caused a personal injustice I can remedy. I have seen no evidence to suggest any systemic fault that might cause injustice to others.

Back to top

Final decision

17. I ended my investigation as it was unlikely to result in a finding of fault, a remedy for X or any other meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman