Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in taking planning enforcement action against unauthorised modifications to a listed building in its area. This is because the complainant has not been caused injustice sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to take enforcement action against unauthorised modifications to a listed building in its area despite a substantial budget increase for planning enforcement. He says this inaction suggests there are issues with the Council’s operational efficiency and resource management.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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. 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s response to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council that despite an increase in its planning enforcement budget, it has still failed to take enforcement action against planning breaches at a listed property which have existed for over two years.
7. The Council explained it had been taking a target area based approach with the limited resources it had but that since its increased budget it was now embarking on the next phase of its initiative to tackle planning breaches in the area where the building Mr X is concerned with is sited.
8. We do not investigate every complaint we receive and while Mr X may be disappointed with the time taken to address the planning breach, as he has not suffered any significant personal injustice, we will not investigate the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not been caused injustice sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman