Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement. This is because it does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence the matters complained about have caused Mr X significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to investigate alleged breaches of legal agreements relating to a development. He says he provided evidence of the breaches, but the Council did not take enforcement action. Mr X says this causes continuing disturbance from increased traffic, noise and road safety risks. He says it has caused him distress and avoidable time and trouble chasing the matter. Mr X wants the Council to investigate the breaches, provide a clear evidence-based explanation of its findings, take enforcement action, apologise for delay, and improve how it handles enforcement cases in future.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

(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. We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. We apply our Assessment Code to decide which cases to investigate. This includes considering the level of personal injustice and whether an investigation would add to the response the Council has already provided. We will not investigate complaints where the claimed injustice is not serious enough to warrant the use of public resources. This applies even where there may have been some fault in the way the Council handled the matter.
6. Mr X reports disturbance and disruption from increased traffic. However, we do not consider the injustice significant enough to justify an investigation. The complaint mainly concerns alleged breaches of planning obligations and the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. Planning enforcement is discretionary and councils may decide a breach does not justify formal action. The Council considered Mr X’s concerns and decided not to take enforcement action as it found no breach had taken place. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision. Even if there was fault in its decision, I do not consider Mr X has suffered significant personal injustice to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence the matters complained about have caused Mr X significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman