Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning and building control matters, and the subsequent complaint process. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and we will not look at its complaint handling in isolation.

The complaint

1. Mr X raises a number of issues regarding the Council’s handling of planning and building control matters regarding works at his home, and its handling of his subsequent complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. And it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.
4. As a publicly funded body we must be careful how we use our limited resources. We conduct proportionate assessments, and reach a decision when we are satisfied we have enough evidence to do so. This means we do not try to answer every single question a complainant may have about what the Council did.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included their planning enforcement and complaint correspondence.
6. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. We will not investigate this complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In reaching this view, I am mindful that:
• Planning enforcement and building control officers have visited Mr X’s property.
• The Council is entitled to reach its own professional judgement on whether the structure represents a breach of planning control, and whether it is expedient to pursue formal planning enforcement action.
• The Council has spoken to Mr X and sent emails, explaining why it believes the structure requires planning permission, and the options available to him. It has provided links to permitted development guidance, and suggested Mr X may wish to contact a third-party planning adviser, apply for pre-application advice, or apply for a certificate of lawfulness.
• The Council has invited Mr X to provide further information/evidence about emails which he claims it failed to respond to.
• The Stage 1 complaint response summarises the Council’s building control notes regarding a wood-burner and flue; these demonstrate Mr X was provided with advice on how to comply with the building regulations and how to obtain the relevant certification.
8. As we have decided not to investigate the substantive planning and building control issues being complained about, it would not be a good use of our resources to look at the Council’s complaint handling in isolation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s handling of the planning and building control matters, and we will not look at the complaints process in isolation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman