Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement and building control. This is because part of the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate it now. Also, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to take enforcement action since 2023 on serious planning, environmental, and fire safety breaches at his neighbour’s property. He says the Council wrongly said the breach was immune from enforcement action. Mr X says this has caused loss of privacy, and impacted the enjoyment of his home, alongside significant harm to his mental and physical health due to ongoing noise and odours. He says he has also incurred substantial professional costs. Mr X wants the Council to acknowledge fault, reimburse the costs he incurred, take enforcement action to remove the alleged unlawful developments and ensure fire safety compliance.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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)
4. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. We will not investigate part of Mr X’s complaint because it is late. Mr X became aware of the alleged planning breaches in 2023. He reported the possible breaches to the Council, and it told him its decision not to take enforcement action. We expect a person to complain to us within 12 months of being aware of a matter. Therefore, this complaint is late, and I see no good reason why Mr X could not have complained sooner.
8. Even if it was not late, we would not investigate the planning enforcement issue. The Council explained it had considered the issues raised and its reasons for not taking enforcement action. It told Mr X the development was immune from enforcement action. Mr X says the Council has applied the wrong planning rules. But the Council has explained the four-year rule and the development was substantially complete before the changes to the relevant time limits for enforcement action came into effect. Therefore, it was immune from enforcement action. While Mr X disagrees, I am satisfied the Council properly considered whether it had grounds to take enforcement action. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it reached its decision.
9. Mr X complained about his neighbour unlawfully installing drainage pipes which he says are creating noise and bad odours in his property. The Council explained to Mr X these were civil matters that should be resolved by the relevant parties. If Mr X believes the noise and odours amount to a statutory nuisance, he can complain to the Council’s environmental health team.
10. Mr X complained about the structural and fire safety of the building. These will not be planning matters. The Council explained to Mr X, building control was signed off by an approved private inspector and it was not involved in it. It advised Mr X to liaise directly with the company to obtain the building-control file and assess whether the sign-off was valid.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because part of the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate it now. Also, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman