Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Uttlesford District Council (17 005 173)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 13-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his concerns about noise nuisance and a breach of planning control at a commercial site near his home. There is no evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Mole Valley District Council (18 001 865)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 12-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mr B has complained that the Council has failed to deal properly with breaches of planning control from a nearby site which have caused noise nuisance and light pollution. The Ombudsman has found no fault in the way that the Council has responded to Mr B's concerns since he complained about breaches of condition in July 2016. I have not investigated Mr B's complaints about matters prior to this because they are out of time.

  • Rother District Council (18 000 220)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 05-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not properly responded to his requests for action on breaches of planning conditions at a development next to his home and should not have approved a planning application. He says he has been put to unnecessary time and trouble pursuing these issues; the failures have meant the ecological richness of the site has been reduced and there has been a negative impact on his home. The Ombudsman finds the Council was at fault in not properly communicating its enforcement decisions to Mr X and this caused injustice to Mr X. The Council has apologised to Mr X for these failings and is taking action to prevent them happening again. In view of this the Ombudsman does not propose the Council takes any further action.

  • South Hams District Council (18 009 856)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 01-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to take enforcement action against a breach of planning control, causing her stress in having to pursue poor quality tree planting on a new development. The Council was at fault for discharging a planning condition without a necessary meeting having taken place, but it has properly considered if there are grounds to take enforcement action and acted accordingly. The fault has thus not caused Mrs X injustice.

  • Folkestone & Hythe District Council (18 012 504)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 31-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains of unreasonable delay by the Council in investigating a report he made of a breach of planning control at a neighbouring property. There was unreasonable delay by the Council. The Council agreed to remedy the injustice to the complainant by completing its planning enforcement investigation within four weeks. It also agreed a time and trouble payment to Mr X.

  • Shropshire Council (18 016 009)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 25-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains that the Council failed to provide the remedy It agreed to provide in respect of an earlier complaint investigated by the Ombudsman. On the evidence so far seen, the Ombudsman finds there was fault by the Council, for which further remedy is now recommended.

  • East Dorset District Council (18 007 994)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 24-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain the Council has failed to take enforcement action on a development at a neighbouring property. They say the development has a direct impact on their amenity. There is no fault in how the Council considered the issue and came to its decision. There is also no fault in how it handled Mr and Mrs X's complaint.

  • Kettering Borough Council (18 007 913)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 16-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's failure to take enforcement action about breaches of planning control and planning permission. The Ombudsman will not investigate because the complaint is late and the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

  • Darlington Borough Council (18 001 956)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 14-Jan-2019

    Summary: Part of this complaint is outside jurisdiction as it relates to a complaint regarding windows the complainant has been aware of since 2010. The other part of this complaint relating to the lack of planning enforcement over a fence is not upheld. This is because there was no fault leading up to the final decision taken by the Council.

  • Cherwell District Council (17 015 715)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 14-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council dealt with her concerns about a neighbour's development and her subsequent complaint. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the way the Council handled her concerns.