Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control or a retrospective planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault and the complainant has not been caused significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control and retrospective planning application for a site in the area where he lives. Mr X says the Council did not properly look into his concerns and the decision to grant retrospective permission was based on inaccurate information.

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision and have considered his comments in response.

Back to top

What I found

4. When a local authority receives a planning application it must look at the development plan and material planning considerations to decide if the proposal is acceptable. Material considerations relate to the use and development of the land in the public interest and includes matters such as the impact on neighbouring properties and the relevant planning policies. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material considerations in determining a planning application.
5. Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission or not complied with planning conditions. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action. Government guidance stresses the importance of affective enforcement action to maintain public confidence in the planning system but says councils should act proportionately. Informal action can often be the quickest and most cost-effective way of achieving a satisfactory result. The council may also request a retrospective application to regularise the situation. However, if the development is considered unacceptable, it may be necessary to take other action to secure compliance such as serving a breach of condition or enforcement notice.

What happened

6. The Council received a planning application to change the use of land and extend an existing caravan park. The Council considered the application and granted permission subject to conditions. One of these conditions said the developer must implement the approved drainage scheme for the site.
7. In 2019, Mr X contacted the Council to complain the developer had not installed a soakaway for the site as required and the approved landscaping had not been implemented. Mr X said this was causing the nearby road to flood. The Council initially said it would not take any action in relation to the possible breach, but later invited the developer to make a retrospective application to regularise the development.
8. The Council considered the retrospective application and granted permission. Mr X is unhappy with how the Council has dealt with the matter. He says it took too long to deal with his concerns about the planning breach and its decision to grant retrospective planning permission was based on inaccurate information.

Assessment

9. I will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control or a retrospective planning application. This is because I am unlikely to find fault and Mr X has not been caused significant injustice.
10. The Council does not need to take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control and formal action is usually only used as a last resort. In this case, the Council did look into Mr X’s concerns about a possible breach of planning control. It contacted the developer and officers visited the site. The Council initially said there had not been a breach, however it later changed its position and agreed some of the planning conditions had not been complied with. The Council therefore invited a retrospective planning application to regularise the development. Mr X says the Council took too long to deal with his concerns. But even if I could say there were unreasonable delays by the Council, I could not say Mr X was caused significant injustice as the Council did later decide the development, as it had been built, was acceptable.
11. I understand Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s decision to grant retrospective permission and has raised concerns about how it dealt with the application. He says the drainage scheme in place is not sufficient. But I am satisfied the Council properly considered the acceptability of the development before granting planning permission. The case officer visited the site and consulted with Yorkshire Water, the Environment Agency, the Lead Local Flood Authority and its environment team and no objections were raised. The case officer’s report also addressed the use of the second access to the site and a planning condition was added to restrict the use of the entrance.
12. As the Council properly considered the application before granting permission it is unlikely I could find fault. I understand Mr X disagrees. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgment to decide the development was acceptable and the Ombudsman cannot question this decision unless it was tainted by fault.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault and Mr X has not been caused significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman