Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly investigate her complaints about breaches of planning conditions near her home. The Council accepted it had not properly investigated Miss X’s concerns or communicated with her. The Council then failed to carry out further action it said it would. These failures caused Miss X avoidable frustration, time and trouble, and some additional cost. The Council agreed to properly investigate Miss X’s concerns, apologise and pay her a financial remedy.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council failed to properly investigate breaches of planning permission near her home over the last several years. She also says the Council failed to update her on its investigations, communicated with her poorly and did not do what it promised in its response to her complaint.
2. As a result, Ms X says her enjoyment of her home has been impacted, she has suffered avoidable stress and inconvenience, and that her property has been damaged. She wants the Council to take the enforcement action it said it would in its final response to her complaint and to properly recognise the impact on her of its failures.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. 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)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have investigated what happened between August 2023 and December 2024, when Miss X complained to the Ombudsman.
8. I have not investigated what happened before August 2023.We can only investigate late complaints where we decide there are good reasons to do so. Miss X knew about her concerns about the Council’s handling of her planning complaints before August 2023 at the time and there is no reason Miss X could not have complained to the Ombudsman sooner.
9. The Council failed to take the action it said it would in its final response to Miss X’s complaint in December 2023. However, Miss X did not complain to the Ombudsman about this until December 2024. While I consider it would have been reasonable to have given the Council several months to provide an update, I do not consider the delay of nearly 12 months was solely due to the Council.
10. Therefore, while I consider there are good reasons to investigate events from August 2023, I do not consider there are good reasons to go back further than this.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
12. Miss X and Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Planning enforcement

13. Councils can take enforcement action if they find planning rules have been breached. However, councils should not take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
14. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. When deciding whether to enforce, councils should consider the likely impact of harm to the public and whether they might grant approval if they were to receive an application for the development or use.
15. Government guidance says: “Effective enforcement is important as a means of maintaining public confidence in the planning system. Enforcement action is discretionary, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control.” (National Planning Policy Framework September 2023, paragraph 60)
16. 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 decided 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.

17. 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.

Background

18. Miss X first raised concerns with the Council about breaches of planning permission and conditions near her home several years ago. The Council carried out two enforcement investigations and closed the second of these without informing Miss X.
19. Miss X complained to the Council, with the help of a planning agent, in mid-2023 that it had not properly investigated her concerns or taken any action about the breaches.
20. The Council accepted it had not kept Miss X or her agent updated about its previous investigations and agreed to carry out a further site visit to review this situation.
21. Following that site visit, the Council sent Miss X a final response to her complaint. In that, the Council accepted it had not properly investigated her concerns about planning breaches, and there appeared to be several breaches which had not been resolved. The Council apologised to Miss X for the failures and said it would issue notices to the property owner to try to address any breaches. In that response the Council said Miss X should contact the Ombudsman is she was not satisfied with its response.
22. When Miss X had heard nothing from the Council in late 2024, she complained again with the help of her planning agent. The Council again directed Miss X to the Ombudsman if she was not satisfied with the Council’s response from late 2023.

My findings

23. In its late 2023 complaint response, the Council accepted it had not properly investigated Miss X’s reports of breaches of planning conditions or communicated with her properly. It apologised for the frustration this had caused her.
24. On the balance of probabilities, the Council failed to properly consider the impact on Miss X of those failures when responding to her complaint. Given the extent of those failures, the range of possible breaches the Council had identified and the possible impact on Miss X, I am not satisfied the Council’s apology, alone, was a suitable remedy. I consider the Council should also make a symbolic payment to Miss X to properly recognise the frustration it caused her.
25. The Council says it does not have any evidence of carrying out the actions it agreed in its 2023 final complaint response, because of poor record keeping in 2024.
26. On the balance of probabilities, I am satisfied the Council did not carry out the further action it said it would in response to Miss X’s complaint. That was fault, as was the poor record keeping.
27. That failure caused Miss X further inconvenience and frustration. However, I cannot say whether the Council’s failure to take further action would have prevented any of the other injustice Miss X says she experienced, including any impact on her home. Enforcement action is discretionary. Even if the Council had issued the notices it said it would, I cannot say what the Council would have done after the property owner responded to those notices. Therefore, I have not decided whether the delays or poor enforcement investigation led to any impact on Miss X amenity or her property.
28. Since we started our investigation, the Council has opened a new planning enforcement investigation into Miss X’s outstanding concerns. Once that investigation is over, depending on the eventual outcome, Miss X may be able to make a further complaint about the impact on her home and amenity.
29. Miss X says the Council’s inaction also led to her incurring significant costs for using a planning agent. The evidence suggests much of these costs relate to periods before August 2023, so I cannot consider those. Using a planning agent was also a choice Miss X made and therefore some of the costs she incurred were ones she chose to pay.
30. However, on the balance of probabilities, I consider the failures the Council accepted led to Miss X feeling she had no choice but to continue to pay her planning agent for help complaining to the Council in 2023. Therefore, the Council should reimburse Miss X for any professional fees she paid for making her complaint to the Council in 2023, at the site visit in late 2023 and chasing the Council in 2024.
31. In its response to my enquires the Council said it has made changes to its planning enforcement team and its enforcement record keeping since 2024. Based on those changes, I do not consider there is evidence to recommend any further service improvements.

Back to top

Action

32. Within one month of my final decision the Council will:
• apologise to Miss X for failing to carry out the actions it agreed in its 2023 response to her complaint;
• pay Miss X £400 to recognise the frustration, inconvenient, time and trouble caused by the failure to properly investigate her reports of planning breaches and to take the action it agreed to; and
• reimburse Miss X (on suitable itemised evidence) for the planning agent costs she paid for making her 2023 complaint and for chasing this with the Council in 2024.
33. Within two months of my final decision the Council will:
• review any outstanding possible planning breaches, including all those covered in the Council’s 2023 response to Miss X’s complaint;
• make a decision about what action the Council should take; and
• send Miss X a written decision, setting out its reasons, about any action it will take and the timeline for this.
34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

35. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman