Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a reported breach of planning control. This is because it is unlikely that we would find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr C, complained how the Council dealt with his report of a breach of planning control at a property close to his home. He says the incorrect states have been used on the roof of the property.

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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered Mr C’s complaint and the Council’s response. I sent a draft version of this decision to Mr C and invited his comments.

Back to top

What I found

4. In 2020, the Council received a planning application of a property near Mr C’s home. The Council granted permission subject to several conditions. One of these conditions required the applicant to use slate on the rood that match that used on the existing building.
5. Once the works were completed, Mr C contacted the Council to complain the developer was breaching the planning conditions as it was not using locally sourced slate for the roof, and because the ridge tiles were rounded rather than square.
6. The Council looked into Mr C’s concerns and the officer who had previously approved the planning application visited the site. However, the Council decided that it had no grounds on which to take enforcement action as it was satisfied that the planning conditions were not being breached.

Assessment

7. I will not start an investigation into Mr C’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his report of a breach of planning controls. This is because it is unlikely we would find evidence of fault with how the Council dealt with the matter.
8. I am satisfied the Council properly considered Mr C’s concerns about a possible breach of planning control before deciding formal enforcement action was not necessary.
9. An appropriate officer visited the site and has seen the roof and, whilst the Council accepted that the materials do not match exactly with those either side, it concluded that the roof has a visually consistent appearance and is not markedly different to roofs on neighbouring properties. Therefore, the Council decided not to take any further action as there had not been a breach of planning control.
10. I understand Mr C disagrees. But it is for the Council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and the Ombudsman cannot question the Council’s professional judgment in this regard unless it is tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered the matter before deciding the planning condition had not been breached, it is unlikely I could find fault.
11. Mr C raised concerns with how the Council dealt with his complaint about this issue. However, we will not investigate the complaint handling issues Mr C raised. It is not good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, where we are not also investigating the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely, we would find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman