Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s planning enforcement team handled planning breaches reported by Mrs X. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making to warrant our involvement, and we cannot achieve the outcome sought by Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to take adequate enforcement action when she reported planning breaches by a nearby property.
2. Mrs X said this negatively impacted on her family’s quality of life and impacted them financially.

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 cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant, the Council and the Council’s planning enforcement strategy.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X complained the Council did not take appropriate enforcement action when she raised many breaches of planning permission by a nearby property.
8. The Council said it considered the breaches raised by Mrs X and addressed them its complaint response. The Council set out the actions it had taken against each of the breaches Mrs X reported.
9. The Council also referred to its planning enforcement strategy and said its approach to enforcement in this case was in line with this strategy.
10. The planning enforcement strategy details how the Council considers proportionality when taking enforcement action. It says the Council’s priority for enforcement actions relate to listed buildings, protected landscapes or protected trees, and while it will investigate other breaches, these may take longer due to availability of resources. It also says, “in all but the most serious of cases, the Council will seek to negotiate compliance rather than pursue formal enforcement action”.
11. The available evidence suggests the Council has considered its enforcement powers and carried out investigations, detailing why it has made decisions in relation to proportionality.
12. 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.
13. 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 whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
14. There is not enough fault in the Council’s decision-making here to warrant our involvement. The available evidence suggests it has acted in line with its publicly available planning enforcement strategy and therefore we cannot question the decisions it has made.
15. In any case, Mrs X’s desired outcome is for the Council to take immediate enforcement action and for the Council to pay compensation for the costs they have incurred by hiring professional representation. The Ombudsman cannot tell the Council it should take either of these actions and therefore we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making and we cannot achieve the outcome she seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman