Summary: We have completed our investigation into how the Council dealt with Mrs X’s allegations of planning breaches and her complaint. We find no fault in the way the Council made its decisions and responded to the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to act on repeated reports of breaches of planning control at site near her home, and delayed responding to her complaint.
2. Mrs X said the development caused dirty roads, noise pollution, dangerous parking, and uncollected refuse bins. She said it affected her health and wellbeing, and it caused unnecessary distress and frustration, and she felt ignored.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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(1), as amended)
5. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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. Mrs X complained to us in March 2025 about the Council’s actions going back to April 2023. As I have said above, we cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons.
8. Mrs X said she did not bring her complaint to us earlier because the situation was ongoing. She also said the Council delayed dealing with her complaint which prevented her from complaining to us earlier.
9. Mrs X knew about the issues she complained of from April 2023. I find there were reasonable opportunities for Mrs X to bring her complaint to us within 12 months of knowing about the issue.
10. I agree there were delays in the Council’s complaint handing (see below). But I find Mrs X did not promptly bring her complaint to us. For example, Mrs X told the Council in December 2024 she would complain to the Ombudsman. She did not complain to us until March 2025.
11. I do not agree that the Council’s delay in complaint handling prevented Mrs X from bringing her complaint to us. Our website says complainants should go through all stages of the organisation’s complaints process. But it also says in most cases we can only investigate if the person complains to us within 12 months of becoming aware of the matter.
12. Further, our website sets out actions complainants can take if their complaint “seems to be stuck in the process” or they have not received an update in a while. It says, “Do not wait to take your complaint further if you are unhappy with the organisation’s response.”
13. Complainants are not prevented from complaining to us if a council delays responding to a complaint at stage two within the timeframes set out in its complaints procedure.
14. I have thoroughly considered Mrs X’s reasons for not bringing her complaint to us within 12 months of knowing about the issue. I do not consider there are good enough reasons for us to exercise our discretion and investigate further back than 12 months before Mrs X brought her complaint to us.
15. For this reason, I have investigated from March 2024 to March 2025, when Mrs X complained to us.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

16. I considered the information and documents provided by Mrs X and the Council. I spoke to Mrs X about her complaint. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement. I considered all comments and further information received before I reached a final decision.
17. I considered the relevant legislation, statutory guidance, and policies, set out below.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Planning enforcement

18. Councils can take enforcement action if they find a breach of planning rules. However, councils should not take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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 December 2024, paragraph 60)

Complaints procedure

22. The Council’s complaints procedure says it will respond to complaints at stage one within 15 working days. At stage two, it will respond within 25 working days.

What happened

23. Mrs X lives near a development site.
24. In March, May, and December 2024, Mrs X complained the developers were in breach of planning conditions. She said these breaches were to do with mud (from the site) on the road, contractors parking on the road (which obstructed access), and site work outside permitted hours.
25. The Council investigated and decided that either there were no breaches or not to take any action because the issues had been resolved.
26. In May 2024, Mrs X complained.
27. The Council explained what it had done in its enforcement investigations. It said it was investigating Mrs X’s recent allegation of a breach and was liaising with the developer about parking. It said it could not enforce parking on residential roads outside the planning site.
28. In June, Mrs X asked the Council to investigate her complaint at stage two.
29. In December, the Council responded. It apologised for the delay. It said this was because of ongoing updates about its enforcement investigations. The Council explained what it had done since May in its enforcement investigations. It said it was investigating Mrs X’s recent report of more breaches.

Analysis

Planning enforcement

30. Mrs X complained the Council failed to act on repeated reports of breaches of planning control at site near her home.
31. I have considered the Council’s investigations of Mrs X’s reports of planning breaches. I have also considered the Council’s investigation into a report from a different complainant about site work outside permitted hours.
32. The Council conducted multiple site visits for each investigation. It appropriately worked with the developer. It found that either the issues were resolved or there were no breaches. The Council was entitled to decide it did not need to take any enforcement action.
33. I do not find fault with the way the Council investigated Mrs X’s reports. I do not agree with Mrs X that the Council failed to act on her repeated reports. I find the Council investigated her reports as it should have done. The fact that Mrs X does not agree with the outcome of the Council’s investigations is not evidence of fault.

Complaint handling

34. Mrs X complained the Council delayed responding to her complaint.
35. The Council should have sent its stage one response within 15 working days of Mrs X’s complaint. This would have been at the end of April 2024. It did not send the response until early May. This was a delay of a week or so. I do not find this delay is significant enough to constitute fault.
36. The Council should have sent its stage two response within 25 working days. This would have been the end of July. It sent its response in early December. This was a delay of approximately four months.
37. I have considered the reason for the Council’s delay. The Council was investigating Mrs X’s allegations about breaches, which were the subject of her complaint. The Council was conducting thorough enforcement investigations as it should have done. The Council took time to properly investigate Mrs X’s reports.
38. Therefore, while the delay responding at stage two was technically not in line with the Council’s complaints procedure, I am not satisfied it constitutes fault.

Back to top

Decision

39. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman