Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the advice the Council gave the complainant regarding the use of his client’s land. This is because the complainant has not suffered any significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about the advice he received from the Council in relation to the process for establishing the lawfulness of the use of his client’s land.

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 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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. It is possible to seek formal confirmation from councils that an existing or proposed development or use of land is lawful and so needs no planning permission. If the Council accepts the evidence provided, it can issue a certificate of lawful use to the applicant.
5. In this case, Mr X sought to clarify the lawfulness of the use of his client’s land as an allotment. Mr X says the Council incorrectly said his client should apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness of Existing Use or Development (CLEUD) or a Certificate of Lawfulness of Proposed Use or Development (CLOPUD) to establish the use of the land. However, Mr X says the use of land as an allotment is not development and therefore applying for a certificate of lawful use would not be the correct course of action. Mr X has also complained that the Council failed to investigate a possible breach of planning control in relation to the site.
6. However, I do not consider Mr X has suffered any significant personal injustice because of these matters. He is not the landowner and it is not his planning application to which concerns regarding the use of the land relate. I understand Mr X may have spent some time corresponding with the Council about these matters. But any injustice suffered as a result would not be significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered any significant personal injustice as a result of the alleged fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman