Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement matter. The Council did not cause unnecessary delay when investigating the matter or taking enforcement action. The matter is on-going and the Council is awaiting the outcome of an appeal before deciding how to continue. The Council was not at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement matter, including poor communication and a lack of updates. Mr X said the Council failed to investigate or take enforcement action regarding unauthorised use of land behind an electricity substation near his property. Mr X said this includes pallets being illegally stored and a fence being erected. Mr X also complained about noise from vehicles and pallets being moved and the land user using a wooden plank to reverse a van, which regularly obstructs the road.
2. Mr X said the Council’s failure to act left him feeling distressed, ignored and concerned about safety risks and visual pollution. Mr X would like the Council to take enforcement action to remove the pallets and fence, secure the land and improve its communication and updates.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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).
4. 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

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mr X and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Law

Planning enforcement

7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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)
10. Councils have a range of options for formal planning enforcement action available to them, including:

• Planning Contravention Notices – to require information from the owner or occupier of land and provide an opportunity to rectify the alleged breach.
• Planning Enforcement Notices – where there is evidence of a breach, to identify it and require action to remedy it.

11. However, 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.
12. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about a planning enforcement notice.

The Council’s policy

13. The Council’s Local Planning Enforcement Plan states that if someone who receives a planning enforcement notice appeals it, the effect of the notice will be suspended until the appeal has been completed.

What happened

14. The Council opened a planning enforcement case in early November 2024 after Mr X reported his concerns about the use of an area of land near his property. Mr X said the land user was illegally storing pallets and had erected a fence. Mr X also said there was noise from vehicles and pallets being moved and the land user used a wooden plank to reverse their van, which regularly obstructed the road. The Council told Mr X it would investigate and tell him about significant events, but it may not be possible to provide him with routine updates. A couple of weeks later, the Council completed a land registry search and sent a letter to the registered landowner. The landowner responded that they no longer owned the land.
15. Between December 2024 and early April 2025, the Council continued its enquiries to confirm who was the current owner/occupier of the land and visited the site on several occasions. On each visit, the Council found no-one on site, so it left letters on waterproof paper attached to the gates asking the owner/occupier to contact the officer. The Council updated Mr X about its visits in January 2025.
16. In early April 2025, the Council asked the fire brigade to assess the site for fire safety. The Council updated Mr X about its visits and its contact with the fire brigade. Around a week later, the fire brigade told the Council it had assessed the site and found no major fire concerns.
17. A few weeks later, the Council visited the site again and spoke to the occupier, who told the Council they were renting the land from a company. The occupier told the Council they had seen the letters the Council had left at the site and had passed them on to the company to respond. A few days later, the Council spoke to the company, who confirmed they were renting the land to the occupier. The Council then told the company that planning permission was required for the change of use of the land.
18. In mid-July 2025, Mr X complained to the Council about its failure to take enforcement action. A local councillor also complained to the Council around this time on Mr X’s behalf. The Council responded about a week later, saying it had asked the officer to update Mr X. The officer then updated Mr X that the investigation was on-going and advised they could not provide him with routine updates due to confidentiality. The Council provided a further response and update to Mr X in late July 2025, stating the investigation was on-going.
19. On 20 August 2025, Mr X escalated his complaint to the Council. The following day, the Council served a Planning Contravention Notice on the legal landowner. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint, saying the planning enforcement investigation was on-going and it would update him once a formal update was available.
20. In late September 2025, the Council sent a letter to the occupier warning that enforcement action may follow if they do not get planning permission. Around this time, Mr X complained to the Ombudsman about the Council’s alleged lack of planning enforcement action. Around a month later, the Council visited the site and noted the land had not been cleared.
21. In mid-November 2025, the Council served enforcement notices on the legal landowner, the company and the occupier. The Planning Inspectorate told the Council in early December 2025 that the enforcement notice had been appealed. A few weeks later, the Council told Mr X the details of the appeal. In early January and early February 2026, the Council repeated the details of the appeal to Mr X so he could access it and comment if he wanted to.
22. In response to my enquiries, the Council said in late April 2026 that the use of the land remains unauthorised, and the Planning Inspectorate’s appeal process is on-going. The Council are awaiting the outcome of the appeal before deciding how to proceed regarding enforcement action. The Council also said that after the Councillor complained on Mr X’s behalf, it regularly updated the Councillor. Regarding Mr X’s complaints about noise from the site and the plank obstructing the road, the Council told the Ombudsman it told Mr X to report these matters to the relevant departments.

My findings

23. The Council opened their investigation into Mr X’s concerns in November 2024. The evidence shows the Council took regular action to progress its investigation and confirm the owner/occupier of the land. The Council also served an enforcement notice once it had evidence to do so. The evidence does not show the Council caused unnecessary delay when investigating the matter or taking enforcement action.
24. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. 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.
25. I have considered the steps the Council took to consider and investigate the issue, and the information it took account of when deciding to take enforcement action. There is no fault in how it took the decision and I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.
26. The Planning Inspectorate’s appeal process is on-going, and the Council is awaiting the outcome before it decides how to proceed. The Council is not at fault for its decision to await the outcome of the appeal as this is in line with its policy.
27. Mr X complained the Council did not regularly update him about its investigation. The evidence shows the Council told Mr X that it could not regularly update him because of confidentiality and workload, but it would update him when there were significant events. The Council was not at fault for the regularity of updates it provided to Mr X. The evidence shows the Council had difficulty contacting the owner/occupier of the land due to the registered landowner details being wrong, but it updated him about some of its visits to the site and of significant events, including the appeal. The Council also regularly updated the Councillor who had complained on Mr X’s behalf.
28. Mr X also complained the Council’s lack of action meant the issues with noise from the site and the plank obstructing the road continued. The Council said it has told Mr X to report these matters to the relevant departments. It is open to Mr X to do this and complain to the Council if he remains unhappy with its response. This investigation concerns planning enforcement.

Back to top

Decision

29. I find no fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman