Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and part of the complaint is out of time.

The complaint

1. Mr X says that he his neighbour has built an extension which is not in accordance with the approved planning permission plans. He is unhappy that the Council will not take planning enforcement action against the neighbour.

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

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

3. 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/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complains about planning permission for a neighbour’s extension which has affected his house. He says that the house has not been built in accordance with approved plans.
7. Planning permission was granted for the extension in January 2023. Mr X says that he was not notified of the planning application but complained when the extension had been built in September 2023.
8. The Ombudsman would expect a complaint to be made within 12 months of becoming aware of a matter. For that reason, the complaint about the planning permission itself is out of time and I see no reasons not to apply this rule.
9. Mr X says that the extension has been built in such a way that their drainage pipe has been encased by the extension. Further, he says that the extension has been built in the wrong place.
10. The Council advised Mr X that any boundary disputes or damage caused by work is a private matter and cannot be the subject of planning enforcement action. The Council also considers that the position of the extension as built would nevertheless receive planning permission and so no enforcement action was expedient.
11. The Council’s Building Control officer inspected the work and concluded that, whilst the work was poor, it was not dangerous and not in a condition that would warrant enforcement action.
12. The Council accepts that there was some delay in its consideration of planning enforcement but, as no action was taken, I do not consider that any significant injustice flows from this.
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. I am satisfied that the Council properly considered its powers in relation to enforcement and enforcement. In the absence of fault causing injustice the Ombudsman will not investigate this matter.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council causing significant injustice. Part of the complaint is out of time.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman