Summary: We do not find the Council at fault for the way it handled Mrs X’s allegations of planning breaches about a nearby building. The Council was entitled to decide there were no planning breaches.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the change of use of a building near her home. She complained the Council:
1. wrongly allowed a change of use for the building;
2. failed to take planning enforcement action; and,
3. wrongly dismissed her complaint.
2. Mrs X said she felt belittled and unheard. She said the Council accused her of being vexatious. She said the residents’ behaviour impacts her and her family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
6. 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, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

7. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. Mrs X complained the Council wrongly allowed a change of use for a building near her home (part a of the complaint).
9. The Council granted the certificate of lawful development in January 2023. In 2024, the Council told Mrs X it had already investigated this decision after someone else complained about it. The Council said its previous investigation found fault and did staff training to learn from it.
10. I find we cannot add to the Council’s previous investigation. Also, I find that further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. For these reasons, I have not investigated part a of the complaint.
11. Mrs X said her complaint centres around the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action despite the original decision being unlawful. I have addressed this in part b, below.
12. I have investigated parts b and c of the complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Planning use classes

15. Planning uses of land or ‘use classes’ are set out in the regulations. They cover a range of typical uses, like residential, business, industrial and commercial.
16. Planning permission is usually needed to change a use from one class to another. Whether a change of use has occurred is a matter of ‘fact and degree’ for the council to decide.

Certificate of lawful development

17. People can ask councils to formally confirm that an existing or proposed development or use of land is lawful and so does not need planning permission. If the council accepts the evidence provided, it can issue a certificate of lawful use or a certificate of lawful development to the applicant.
18. This may happen where:

• the council has already granted planning permission for the use or development;
• a development is a ‘permitted development’ and so deemed acceptable because it complies with limits in the regulations; or,
• the development was unlawful, but the time limit for enforcement action has now passed.

Planning enforcement

19. 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.
20. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should only happen 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.
21. 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.
22. 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)

The Council’s complaints procedure

23. The Council’s complaints procedure says it will not consider complaints that are over one year old. It says if someone has left it more than 12 months since knowing about the problem, the Council will use its discretion when deciding if it will consider the complaint.

What happened

24. The owners of a building near Mrs X’s house applied to the Council for a certificate of lawful development (CLD). In January 2023, the Council granted a CLD. This allowed the building to be used for a different purpose.
25. In July 2023, Mrs X complained to the Council’s planning enforcement team that it should not have allowed the change of use. She said there was a breach of planning permission. The Council began an enforcement investigation.
26. In August 2024, the Council told Mrs X the outcome of its investigation. It decided there was a minor breach of planning permission. It took action to resolve the breach. It decided it was not proportionate to take any further enforcement action.
27. Mrs X complained shortly after.
28. The Council told Mrs X it had already investigated its 2023 decision when someone else complained earlier. The Council said it found it had made a mistake when it granted the CLD. It said it had completed staff training since then. The Council said because it had already investigated this issue and found fault, further investigation was unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
29. The Council explained how it investigated Mrs X’s planning complaints. It explained the difference between the use classes. The Council said it decided it would likely give planning permission for the development so it would not be expedient to revoke the CLD. It said it decided the use of the property was largely in line with the CLD. It said there was one minor issue which had been resolved.
30. Mrs X then complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

Planning enforcement

31. Mrs X complained the Council failed to take planning enforcement action (part b of the complaint). She said the Council only took action on one minor issue. She wanted the Council to revoke the CLD.
32. Mrs X complained the Council closed her enforcement complaint without taking any action despite the original decision being unlawful (see part a, above). Mrs X said the Council had the power to take enforcement action. She disagrees with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action.
33. I find the Council investigated the alleged breaches as it should have. The Council considered if planning enforcement was proportionate, and if it might grant approval if it received an application for the use. So, I find the Council did what it should have done.
34. Also, I find the Council took informal planning enforcement action on the minor breach it found. This was appropriate and proportionate.
35. I find the Council’s decisions and actions were in line with government guidance. The Council was entitled to make the decisions it did. Therefore, I do not find the Council at fault.

Complaint handling

36. Mrs X complained the Council wrongly dismissed her complaint (part c of the complaint). She said the Council did not investigate the part of her complaint about its January 2023 decision.
37. In its first complaint response, the Council said because it had already investigated this issue, found fault, and taken action to learn from it, further investigation was unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
38. The Council was entitled to decide not to investigate this part of Mrs X’s complaint because it had already investigated it. We would not expect a council to reinvestigate something it had already investigated. It was appropriate for the Council to tell Mrs X what it found in that previous complaint investigation and the action it took as result of its findings.
39. However, in its second complaint response, the Council said its decision not to investigate this part of Mrs X’s complaint was on the basis of time limits, not that someone had already made a similar complaint. This was because Mrs X complained to the Council in August 2024 about its January 2023 decision, over 19 months later.
40. In this response, the Council considered whether to exercise its discretion and investigate this part of Mrs X’s complaint. It found it had already investigated its handling of the CLD and had found fault. It said further investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
41. The Council’s decision not to investigate this part of Mrs X’s complaint was in line with its complaints procedure (set out above). The Council was entitled to make that decision. I find no fault with how the Council made that decision. Therefore, I cannot challenge the outcome of that decision.
42. I find the Council gave different reasons for not investigating this part of Mrs X’s complaint. This is not best practice. However, I do not consider this is significant enough to be fault. This is because the outcome was the same: the Council did not investigate this part of Mrs X’s complaint because it had already investigated it.

Back to top

Decision

43. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman