Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case. There is insufficient evidence that fault by the Council has affected the planning enforcement outcome or caused the complainant a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about delay in the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case regarding a breach of planning control at a neighbouring property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, 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))

3. With regard to the first bullet point above, we can 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered:
• information provided by Mrs X.
• information about the planning applications for the site, available on the Council’s planning website.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I appreciate Mrs X is very unhappy about the works undertaken at the neighbouring property, and that they were not completed in accordance with the previously approved plans.
6. But 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.
7. And even if there is some evidence of fault, we will also need to consider whether this has affected the outcome or caused the complainant a significant injustice. In other words, we will only pursue a complaint if there is clear evidence of fault in the way a decision was made which, but for that fault, is likely to have led to a different decision or outcome for the complainant.
8. With planning enforcement, councils can take action if they find planning rules have been breached. However, they should not take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control. Planning enforcement is discretionary, and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. As such, 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.
9. I consider there is insufficient evidence that fault in the Council’s handling of the planning enforcement case has affected the outcome here, so we will not investigate the complaint. This is because the Council was entitled to invite the submission of a retrospective application for what had been built and, whilst it has acknowledged there was delay in determining the application, I have seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council eventually reached its decision.
10. I appreciate the delay and uncertainty would have been frustrating for Mrs X However, given the planning enforcement outcome is likely to have been the same but for this delay, on balance, I do not consider any associated injustice is significant enough to investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence that fault in the handling of the planning enforcement case has affected the outcome or caused the complainant a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman