Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council has dealt with a breach of planning control. Mr X says there have been long delays and he disagrees with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. Mr X says the unauthorised development has a significant impact on his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action. Government guidance stresses the importance of affective enforcement action to maintain public confidence in the planning system but says councils should act proportionately.
5. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body against enforcement decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
6. In this case, the Council has accepted planning permission was needed to use the property as a house in multiple occupancy. However, it has decided not to take formal enforcement action as it considers it likely it would grant permission for the development if an application were received.
7. I understand Mr X disagrees. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement in this regard, and it has explained why it does not consider enforcement action necessary. Councils also do not have to take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
8. Mr X has complained about how long it took the Council to look into his concerns. But I do not consider he has suffered any significant injustice because of the delays as the Council ultimately decided not to take enforcement action.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman