Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a lack of planning enforcement action against a change of use for a property close to the complainant’s home. The Council has sought a retrospective planning application, and the complainants have put in objections. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council has failed to take enforcement action against the change of use of a property near her home. The property is being used as a short-term holiday let and this is affecting her family’s amenity and mental wellbeing.
2. Ms X wants the Council to prohibit the use of the property while the planning application is being processed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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
• 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 Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X reported the change of use of a nearby property to the Council in May.
7. The Enforcement team contacted the property owners through July to October. The owners assured the Council they would put in a planning application to regularise the change of use.
8. The Council advised Mrs X that it would consider what action to take if it did not receive an application by January.
9. In response to my enquiries the Council confirms it received a retrospective application to change the use of the property to a short-term holiday let in December. However, because of missing information it could not validate the application until the end of March. It also confirms it has publicised the application and the deadline to decide the application is the end of May. However, it is possible to extend this.
10. The Council’s website shows the application is live and that Mrs X and her family members have objected.
11. I understand Mrs X is frustrated by the time taken to deal with the breach of planning control. However, the Council has been in contact with the property owner and has sought and received a retrospective planning application. This is currently being processed. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify investigating this matter.
12. Mrs X wants the Council to prohibit the use of the property as a short-term holiday let while the planning application is being processed. However, this is not something the Ombudsman can achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• We have not seen sufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation; and
• We cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman