Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against a breach of planning control. We consider further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. Also, it is not an effective use of our resources to look at complaints about the complaint process where we are not considering the substantive matter.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to follow its planning enforcement procedures. He also complains about the way the Council dealt with his complaint.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Councils can take enforcement action where someone needs, but does not have, planning permission for a development or where the developer has not complied with conditions attached to a planning consent. There is a wide range of informal and formal action which councils can take.
6. However, it is not our role to decide whether a council should take enforcement action.
7. Government guidance does not say that councils should take action against all unauthorised development, but a council should take action where serious harm to local public amenity is being caused.
8. The Ombudsman does not provide a right of appeal against the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. Our role is to review the process by which the Council reached its decision.
9. I understand the Council did not complete an inspection of the whole site which was the subject of Mr X’s report before reaching its initial decision. However, it has now carried out a full site visit in response to Mr X’s concerns. It is satisfied it is not expedient to take enforcement action.
10. The Council considered Mr X’s reports, inspected the site and provided its reasons for deciding not to take enforcement action. I consider that further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.
11. Mr X also complains about the way the Council responded to his complaint, including a delay in its response. The Council has apologised for the delay in responding and I consider it is not an effective use of our resources to look at complaints about the complaint process where we are not considering the substantive matter.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council made its decision not to take enforcement action against a breach of planning control. We consider further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman