Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to act on Mrs X’s report that her neighbour submitted an incorrect ownership certificate on their planning application. We do not consider this caused Mrs X a significant personal injustice. And we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mrs X says the Council has refused to act on her report that her neighbour has encroached over her property boundary, raised their ground level by more than 30 centimetres and laid a patio without planning permission. She also complains the Council accepted an incorrect ownership certificate on the planning application.
2. Mrs X wants the neighbour to lower their patio.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, 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 says her neighbour’s retrospective planning application for their patio was invalid because they completed the wrong ownership certificate on the application form. Therefore the planning permission granted by the Council is invalid and the Council should act on the breach of planning control.

7. Responsibility for completion of the correct ownership certificate lays with the planning applicant.
8. Section 65(5) of the Town and Country Planning Act says:

"A local planning authority shall not entertain an application for planning permission [or permission in principle] unless any requirements imposed by virtue of this section have been satisfied”.

Section 65 of the Act is about giving notice to other owners of the property involved, to enable them to make representations on the planning application.

9. I understand Mrs X told the Council the neighbour had not completed the correct ownership certificate. I would therefore expect the Council to make proportionate enquiries (taking into account that it cannot adjudicate in an ownership dispute) before deciding whether to proceed with deciding the application.
10. However, even if the Council failed to make any enquiries with the applicant I cannot say this caused Mrs X a significant personal injustice. She was aware of the application and submitted her objections. Her objections were considered by the Council when it determined the application.
11. The Planning Officer’s report also shows the Council considered the impact of the development on Mrs X’s home and her objections before it decided to grant planning permission. Therefore I consider the outcome of the planning application is likely to have been the same.
12. As the development has received planning permission, there is no breach of planning control for the Council to consider.
13. Mrs X says the neighbour’s development has encroached on her property. This is a civil matter between Mrs X and her neighbour. It is not a matter for the Council to resolve.
14. Finally, we cannot require the Council to make the neighbour lower their patio.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• We do not consider she has suffered a significant personal injustice as she objected to her neighbour’s planning application and the Council considered her objections and the impact of the development on her home.
• We cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman