Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take enforcement action to control his neighbour’s development. We have ended our investigation because the complaint is late there are no good reasons why Mr X could not have complained sooner.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to take enforcement action about his neighbour’s development. Mr X says the extension does not comply with planning permission and policies.
2. He says this has caused significant distress and reduced the value of his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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
• 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 no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

4. 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

What I have and have not investigated

5. My reasons for not investigating this complaint further are set out in the “Analysis” section of this decision statement.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

8. Not all development requires planning permission from local planning authorities. Certain developments are deemed permitted, providing they fall within limits set within regulations. This type of development is known as ‘permitted development’.
9. 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.

What happened

10. I have summarised the key events; this is not meant to detail everything that happened.

Contextual information

11. In 2020, Mr X’s neighbour (Mr B) built an extension. Mr X was concerned it was not built in accordance with the relevant planning permission and contravened several planning policies. He reported this to the Council. The Council issued an enforcement notice that required Mr B to take remedial action within a timeframe of 6 months. Mr X says he was not notified of this and Mr B did not comply with the enforcement notice.
12. In March 2023, Mr X asked the Council to carry out a site visit and view the extension from his property. He was supported by a local councillor (Mrs P) who liaised with relevant officers on behalf of Mr X.
13. The following month, the Mrs P advised Mr X the site was inspected by officers from the Council’s enforcement and building control teams. Based on this, the Council decided no further action would be taken.
14. Disappointed and frustrated with this outcome, Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman in May 2023. He was advised by us that he had to make a formal complaint to the Council before our service was able to consider the matter. That same month, Mr X was informed by the Council there were no irregularities with the development that warranted action by the Council and the case was closed.
15. Mr X formally complained to the Council in September 2025. The Council maintained its previous position that the development, as built, did not warrant enforcement action.
16. Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman. He said Mr B continues to flout planning laws and had enlarged the development by building a raised platform. His requests for action are either declined or ignored.

Analysis

17. Before we begin or continue our investigations, we consider two, linked questions, which are:
• Is it likely there was fault?
• Is it likely any fault caused a significant injustice?
18. If at any point during our involvement with a complaint, we are satisfied the answer to either question is no, we may decide not to investigate or to end an investigation we have already started.
19. I should not investigate this complaint further. This is because:
• We are unlikely to find enough evidence of fault to warrant a further investigation. In response to my enquiries the Council has agreed to investigate the raised plinth that was not erected at the time of its previous involvement in 2023. This is the appropriate course of action and the Ombudsman cannot add anything further.
• Mr X’s complaint about what happened between 2020 and 2023 is late. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. As outlined in paragraph four, we will not usually investigate a late complaint unless there are good reasons, and I do not consider this to be the case.

• Mr X was advised that his complaint to us in 2023 was premature. He did not formally complain until over two years later. Mr X says he was told by Mrs P that the matter was still pending. I have seen no evidence of this. The case records show both the Council and Mrs P told Mr X no futher action was to be taken and the matter was closed. He also says he was awaiting more information in order to progress his complaint. It is my assessment that Mr X had sufficient information to make a complaint in 2023.
• This is therefore a late complaint. We may exercise discretion to investigate late complaints if we decide there are good reasons for not complaining sooner. In determining this, we consider whether there is a realistic prospect of reaching a sound, fair, and meaningful decision about events that happened more than twelve months ago, and whether we are satisfied that the complainant could not reasonably be expected to have complained sooner. This is because we provide a free service but must use public money carefully.
• I find there were no good reasons for the complaint not to have been brought to us sooner. I therefore do not have sufficient grounds to exercise discretion to investigate a late complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have ended my investigation. The complaint is late and I have not seen evidence to show a further investigation would result in a finding of fault in the Council’s decision-making process. A further investigation would also not achieve a meaningful outcome for Mr X other than what has recently been offered to him.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman