Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case regarding a ‘house in multiple occupation’ which does not have planning permission. This is because:

The complaint

1. Mr X raises a number of issues about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case regarding a ‘house in multiple occupation’ since 2014.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. 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)
5. We cannot investigate something that affects all or most of the people in a council’s area. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(7), as amended)
6. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
7. The law also says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
8. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) considers complaints about freedom of information (FoI). Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X and the Council.
• information about the December 2023 Development Management Committee meeting, as available on the Council’s website.
• the previous planning applications for the use of the site as an HMO, as available on the Council's website
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. I appreciate Mr X is very unhappy about the Council’s decision not to pursue further enforcement action against the HMO use of the site, and he has raised several concerns about the Council’s handling of the case over the years.
11. But the time restriction detailed in paragraph 4 would apply to the events/issues he was aware of prior to the December 2023 Development Management Committee meeting. I see no good reasons why Mr X would have been prevented from contacting us sooner, so we will not investigate these historic matters now.
12. And with reference to paragraph 5, we cannot investigate any parts of the complaint about the use of council taxpayers’ money to challenge the Planning Inspectorate’s decision to quash the enforcement notice the Council had issued. This is because it is a matter which affects all or most people in the Council’s area. The restriction detailed in paragraph 6 also prevents us from investigating the conduct of those court proceedings.
13. And if Mr X has concerns about the way the Council has handled FoI requests, then it seems reasonable that he should raise this with the ICO. So, we will not investigate such matters either.
14. Finally, the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether the complainant disagrees with the decision the Council made. We will also consider whether any fault in the decision-making process is likely to have affected the planning outcome/decision.
15. In that regard, it is important to highlight that councils have the discretion to take enforcement action to remedy a breach, but they are under no obligation to do so. In each case, councils will decide whether further action is expedient, having regard to the provisions of the development plan and to any other material planning considerations. Relevant planning policies and other material considerations may pull in different directions; it is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to these factors.
16. I have considered the steps the organisation took to consider the issue at the late‑December 2023 Committee meeting, and the information it took account of when deciding not to pursue further enforcement action. I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault in how it took the decision, so I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong, and our further involvement in the case is unlikely to lead to a substantively different outcome. So, the Ombudsman will not investigate this part of the complaint either.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
• Parts of the complaint are late, and it is reasonable to expect him to have contacted us sooner.
• We cannot investigate issues which affect all or most people in the Council’s area, or the conduct of court proceedings.
• It is reasonable to expect him to contact the ICO regarding the Council’s response to information requests.
• There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its planning enforcement decision in late-2023, and our continued involvement is unlikely to lead to a different planning outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman