Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of matters relating to the installation of a footpath and road widening at a development site in her locale. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of matters relating to the installation of a footpath and road widening at a development site in her locale. She says the Council delayed for 16 months between the completion of road and footpath works which did not accord to the permission given, and in refusing the subsequent application which sought to regularise the works.

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, 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. (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 and the Council, including its responses to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. I gave the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what she said.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Planning permission was given for housing development at a site in Ms X’s locale in 2020 where one of the conditions attached to the permission required works for a footpath and road widening.
8. In 2022 the Council received an application to vary the condition in relation to these works which it refused. It did so because accurate drawings had not been provided and there had been no willingness by the applicant to enter into a Deed of Variation to the legal agreement so the Council could determine whether to grant permission for the works that had taken place.
9. In responding to Ms X’s complaint about these matters, the Council explained that while permission had been refused for the works for the reasons explained above, the breach was a technical breach and the Local Highways Authority was in fact satisfied with what had been built. So while there had been a technical breach, the Council did not consider it expedient to take enforcement action against the breach.
10. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal. We cannot question decisions take by councils if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. While Ms X may be dissatisfied by the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action, this is a decision it is entitled to make and there is no evidence to suggest fault affected it.
11. In responding to my draft decision Ms X has referred to the Council stating the breach is a technical breach and says that harm has been done between the time the works were carried out and the Council’s decision to refuse permission. She has also said that while Highways has confirmed it is satisfied with the works, the decision on the application is the Council’s to make. This is correct. The Council made its decision to refuse the application for the reasons already stated and then decided not to take enforcement action and took into account the views of Highways on what had been built. The Council has correctly told Ms X that mortgage and insurance issues are not its concern.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman