Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council has dealt with his concerns about a possible breach of planning control. Mr X says the development impacts his privacy and has affected his wellbeing and the Council should take enforcement action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. 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. 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.
5. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body against enforcement decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
6. In this case, the Council looked into Mr X’s concerns, visited the site and took measurements. However, it decided it had no grounds on which to take enforcement action as the development was allowed under permitted development rights.
7. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action and says the height of the decking should be reduced. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide there had not been a planning breach. As the Council properly considered if it was necessary to take enforcement action, it is unlikely I could find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman