Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a listed building enforcement notice. The notice was served 13 years ago, and it was reasonable for Ms X to use her right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate if she wished to challenge the notice at the time. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, or Ms X experiencing a significant injustice, in the more recent events.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council served her a listed building enforcement notice in 2011, but did not serve the same to the properties next door. She questions whether the notice was legally enforceable. She says the matter lowered the value of her property and caused significant distress, exacerbating her mental health condition. She says the Council also acted dishonestly in 2023 by telling her a letter of comfort had been issued when it had not.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
4. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about planning enforcement notices.
5. 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

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X’s complaint concerns a listed building enforcement notice the Council served to her in 2011. The Council attached information to the notice about
   Ms X’s right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. The timescales to use this right will now have passed. However, this does not mean we can investigate the matter instead. It was reasonable for Ms X to make use of her right of appeal.
9. In any event, we also would now consider the matter late. We expect complaints to be brought to us within 12 months of the person becoming aware of the matter. There is not a good reason for the significant delay, and we could not carry out a fair investigation given the time that has passed. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the notice itself. I have therefore considered the later events
   Ms X complained about on the basis that the notice was rightly served.
10. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the events of 2023 to warrant investigation of these matters alone. The Council used its discretion to issue a letter of comfort which made clear it would accept the future owner of the property carrying out the outstanding works required, rather than Ms X. This was to Ms X’s benefit, in order to aid the sale of her property. The Council has already apologised for some delay in issuing this letter and explained its reasons to Ms X.
11. There is insufficient evidence the delay in issuing the letter caused Ms X a significant injustice that would warrant action over and above the apology the Council has already provided. The injustice Ms X claims in her complaint to us is related to the events of 13 years ago which we cannot investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because the substantive matter is late and was a decision Ms X could have appealed to a government minister. There is insufficient evidence of both fault and injustice in recent events, and so it would not be proportionate for us to investigate those matters in isolation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman