Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that the Council failed to consult her about her neighbour’s development and did not take into account its impact on her property. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains the Council failed to consult her about her neighbour’s development, which she thinks is too large and overshadows her property. She is unhappy the Council did not investigate the builder’s practices and has declined to take action to move or remove the development. She is also concerned about possible damage to her property.

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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) allows certain development without the need for planning permission. This is known as ‘permitted development’. Permitted development rights are subject to limitations and exclusions, but when a proposal falls within the parameters of development allowed by the Order it will not require planning permission.
6. Although permitted development does not require planning permission a person may apply to the local planning authority for a certificate of lawful development (CLD) for their proposal. An application for a CLD determines whether the development proposed is permitted or whether it requires planning permission. If the proposal is permitted development, and if the applicant carries out the development in accordance with the approved plans, the Council cannot stop it.
7. Ms X’s neighbour applied for a CLD for their proposed development several years ago. An application for a CLD does not require the Council to consult neighbours as the issue under consideration is limited to whether the proposal amounts to ‘permitted development’. The Council was not therefore at fault for failing to inform Ms X about the application and it could not consider the impact of the proposal on her property.
8. Ms X’s neighbour instructed a private building control company to oversee the building work and monitor its compliance with the Building Regulations and this meant the Council was not responsible for checking issues such as the depth of foundations.
9. Ms X has concerns about possible damage to her property resulting from her neighbour’s building work but this is a private civil matter between her and her neighbour. It is not therefore something the Council can take action to resolve.
10. Ms X is also concerned her neighbour has built their development too tall and has failed to comply with the plans they submitted for their CLD application. But the Council has investigated the issue and confirmed the work has been completed in accordance with the plans and with the neighbour’s ‘permitted development’ rights. This is broadly in line with the information I have seen which includes Ms X’s pictures of the development and the neighbour’s plans.
11. The Council acknowledged Ms X’s concerns about the builder’s working hours and invited her to log any ‘out of hours’ working but the work is now complete and the issue is therefore resolved.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman