Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with breaches of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault and the complainant has not suffered any significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council has dealt with breaches of planning control and its decision not to take enforcement action.

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 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 looked into Mr X’s concerns and an enforcement officer visited the site. However, the Council decided there had not been a breach in relation to Mr X’s concerns about the creation of a new road and the removal of trees from the site. It also decided not to take action in relation to a shipping container at the site.
7. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. But the Council has explained why it does not consider enforcement action necessary, and it was entitled to use its professional judgement in this regard. Councils also do not need to take formal 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 any delays as the Council ultimately decided it should not take enforcement action.
9. Mr X has complained about the Council’s complaint handling. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. Mr X has not suffered any significant injustice because of any delays with the Council’s enforcement investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman