Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that it will not take planning enforcement action relating to a footpath near his home. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council has refused to take planning enforcement action relating to an unlawful new footpath near his property. He says the footpath has affected his residential amenity and reduced the value of his home. He wants the Council to apologise, compensate him for the loss of amenity and apologise to his MP for misleading them in correspondence about this matter.

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.

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

3. 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In its complaint response, the Council said its position is that the footpath does have planning permission. Therefore, as there has been no breach of planning control, it will not take enforcement action.
7. Mr X disagrees with this position. He says the Council’s Highways department has also provided information both to him and his MP which contradicts this position.
8. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council’s planning department is the decision-maker when determining whether an applicant has breached planning permission and whether it is expedient to take enforcement action. The Council’s position is that the footpath has planning permission, there is no breach of planning control and so it will not take enforcement action. Although I accept Mr X disagrees with this position, the Council has appropriately considered his concerns, including the correspondence from Highways, before reaching its decision. As it has appropriately considered his concerns, we will not question the outcome. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman