Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against breaches of planning and listed building control. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decisions. Also, we do not consider the complainant has suffered enough personal injustice to warrant our involvement. Finally, we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains for his partner Ms Y. He complains about the way the Council is running the planning process for a pub in the village where they live.
2. He says:
• The pub owner fails to follow parking standards leading to congestion and an increased risk to children and elderly residents.
• The changes have led to the loss of the pub as a community space for resident’s clubs etc.
• Ms Y has been banned from the pub because she objected to the changes.
• Dividing the pub into two separate business means part of the village heritage is lost.
• Stress over overseeing every application has negatively impacted Ms Y’s mental health and the pub owner has intimidated her.
• Public praise of the pub owner by the head of planning cast aspersions on Ms Y’s character by making the community believe she is wrong and misguided; and
• The division of community has led to a breakdown of trust between the Council and other community businesses.
3. Mr X wants the Ombudsman to:
• Introduce changes to ensure the same problems are not repeated.
• Direct the Council to issue a moratorium on making decision on any outstanding or future planning applications for the pub.
• Restructure the planning department.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. I understand Ms Y has concerns about:
• the impact of the changes to the pub on the local community
• the actions of the pub owner affecting her personally
• loss of village heritage; and
• a breakdown of trust between the Council and other community businesses.
8. However, these are not personal injustices to Ms Y and, as she and Mr X have no authority to complain on behalf of anyone else, these matters are not something we can consider.
9. Ms Y says the praise of the pub owner has made the community believe she is misguided and wrong. However, we have seen no substantive evidence of this.
10. In 2023, the Council refused an application to change the use of part of the pub building from a pub to a farm shop and delicatessen. The reason for refusal was that there was not enough information to show the proposed mixed use would not harm the operation of the business as a pub.
11. The Council opened a planning enforcement case into the owners operating part of the pub as a cafe and breaches of listed building control.
12. Following investigation the Council decided:
• The mixed use of the property has not led to further physical changes to the building.
• The new café service delivers to leisure facilities for residents and visitors.
• The café opening times do not have a detrimental impact on neighbours.
13. The Council decided not to take any enforcement action. Having investigated the breach of planning control and inspecting the site, this is a decision the Council is entitled to make.
14. I understand Ms Y wants the Ombudsman to issue a moratorium on any current and future planning applications for the pub. This is not something we can achieve as the Council cannot order an individual or business to stop submitted planning applications. And it has a statutory duty to determine any valid applications it receives.
15. I also understand Ms Y wants the Council to restructure the planning department. However, we cannot involve ourselves in personnel matters.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because :
• Any injustice Ms Y has experienced is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
• We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning application or the decision not to taken enforcement action to justify an investigation.
• We cannot instruct the Council not to accept planning applications for the pub or restructure the planning department.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman