Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council approving a planning application for a retaining wall, and the lack of response from building control when the complainant raised subsequent concerns about the wall’s safety. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner about the planning application decision, and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council latterly considered the safety concerns he raised.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s consideration of a planning application for a retaining wall next to his property, which he believes is unsafe. He also says the building control department failed to respond to the concerns he raised more recently about the stability of the wall.

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.

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

4. 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 or overturn the Council’s decision. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. And 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

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X.
• information about the planning application, available on the Council’s planning website.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The time restriction detailed in paragraph 5 above applies to any parts of the complaint about the Council’s consideration of the planning application for the wall. This is because the application was considered in 2020, with Mr X submitting objections at that time, and the wall was completed in early-2021. Yet Mr X did not contact the Ombudsman until June 2025. I see no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider this late part of the complaint now.
8. And when Mr X contacted building control with further concerns about the wall in mid-July 2024, a Council building inspector visited the site and determined there was no immediate danger or evidence of potential danger. This is a professional judgement the inspector was entitled to reach, even if Mr X and his own surveyor disagree with it. With reference to paragraph 4 above, there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision, so we will not investigate this part of the complaint either. Notwithstanding this, it would have been good practice if the Council had updated Mr X about the outcome of the inspection prior to the submission of his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to have contacted us sooner about the planning application decision, and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the concerns he raised in mid-2024.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman