Summary: X complained that the Council has failed to take planning enforcement action against a neighbour, who, X alleges, is running a business without planning permission on land behind X’s home. X said the use of the land affects their amenities. We completed our investigation because we found no evidence of fault in the decision-making process.

The complaint

1. The person that complained to us will be referred to as X.
2. X complained about the Council’s decision not to take planning enforcement action against a neighbour who, X alleges, is running a business on land behind X’s home.
3. X said the use of the land affects their amenity.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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. 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)
6. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. The Council’s first enforcement investigation was closed over 3 years ago. I decided not to investigate the Council’s decision on this enforcement case, as it happened more than 12 months before X brought their complaint to our attention and could have done so sooner.
8. The Council’s second enforcement investigation ended less than a year ago. This happened within our 12-month time limit and so I have considered and investigated the events related to the second enforcement investigation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I read the complaint and invited X to discuss it with me. I read the Council’s response to the complaint and considered documents from its planning enforcement files.
10. I gave the Council and X an opportunity to comment on am earlier draft of this decision and took account of the comments I received.

Back to top

What I found

Planning enforcement powers

11. 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 determined 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.
12. 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

13. X complained to the Council that their neighbour was running a business from a building behind X’s home.
14. The Council issued a planning contravention notice (PCN) and the business owner responded to its questions. The response said the land had been used for storage and vehicle parking to support a property service business. The owner said they did repair their own vehicles on the site.
15. The Council:
• checked Companies House to look for businesses registered by the owner and on the site, but found no evidence to contradict information provided in the PCN;
• visited the site, but found no evidence to show a different use, other than that claimed by the owner, was operating from the site; and
• found no advertising, internet/trader reviews or any other information that might indicate the use of the land had changed.
16. The Council decided to close its case but said it would re-open its investigation if it received new evidence.

My findings

17. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made. We look for evidence of fault causing a significant injustice to the individual complainant.
18. To investigate X’s allegation, the Council had to decide whether the use had changed. This is a question of fact and degree which is for the Council and its officers to decide. Our role is not to remake that decision, but to check whether a proper decision-making process was followed beforehand.
19. Before it made its decision, the Council considered X’s allegation, was aware of its enforcement powers, served a notice to gather evidence, carried out an investigation and has kept a record of the outcome. This is the planning enforcement decision-making process we expect and so I find no fault.

Back to top

Decision

20. I completed my investigation because I found no fault in the way the Council made its enforcement decision on the most recent case X brought to its attention.
21. I decided not to investigate an earlier enforcement investigation because the events occurred long before our 12-month time limit, and if X had concerns about the process by which the decision was made, they could have come to us sooner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman