Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s alleged failure to take planning enforcement action against unlawful activities at a quarry. The Council has not investigated his concerns. This was fault. The Council agreed to respond to Mr X’s complaint and provide a financial remedy to him that reflects the unnecessary time and trouble he was put to in pursuit of this matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s alleged failure to take planning enforcement action against unlawful activities at a quarry near his home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed the complaint and background papers provided by Mr X. I discussed the complaint with Mr X by telephone. I sent a draft decision statement to Mr X and the Council and considered the comments of both parties on it.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X contacted the Council in May 2019 to lodge a complaint about unlawful activities at a nearby quarry, that is to say activities undertaken without planning permission. Mr X was also concerned neither the Council nor the operator had complied with the requirements of a court order.
6. Mr X chased a response from the Council in the following months to no avail. He complained to the Ombudsman in November 2019. I asked the Council for a copy of its complaint response in February 2020. The Council assured me a complaint response would be ‘signed off’ in the first week of April. However, the Council has still not dealt with the complaint a year on from Mr X’s contact with it.
7. The Council’s handling of the complaint has been dilatory. This is fault. I cannot deal with the substantive issues of the complaint in this investigation until the Council addresses the issues. Mr X may complain again to this service about the substantive issues if he remains dissatisfied after receiving the Council’s final response.
8. Where we find fault by a council we must go on to assess the injustice to the complainant and, where possible, a remedy for the injustice. I recommend the Council now provides a comprehensive response to all the issues raised in Mr X’s complaint. This should be done within four weeks of the date of the final decision on this complaint.
9. I find Mr X was put to unnecessary time and trouble in pursuit of this matter with the Council and the Ombudsman. The Council agreed a time and trouble payment of £250 to Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

10. There was fault by the Council. The complaint was closed because the Council agreed to remedy the injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman