Summary: We cannot by law investigate this complaint about an alledged failure by the Council to provide information to the Planning Inspectorate for the purposes of an appeal. This is because we have no legal jurisdiction to investigate a complaint when an appeal has been made to the Planning Inspectorate, acting on behalf of the relevant Government minister.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mr Q) complains about the Council’s handling of a high hedge complaint following it issuing his neighbour with a remedial notice. He says the Council failed to provide him with information about an appeal being made against the notice and that it caused delay due to not providing required information to the Planning Inspectorate.
2. In summary, Mr Q says that in the absence of any information suggesting otherwise, he had an expectation that action would be taken by the Council to enforce the remedial notice. He says the Council’s poor communication caused him uncertainty. He also says the Council caused many months of delay to appeal proceedings, causing him significant time and trouble. As a desired outcome, Mr Q wants the Council to be held accountable for not following correct processes and for keeping him informed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended). The Planning Inspectorate acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In July 2023, Mr Q made a high hedge complaint to the Council which resulted in it issuing his neighbour with a remedial notice in May 2024. This required Mr Q’s neighbour to take action in respect of the high hedge. However, Mr Q says that over the next four months, he noticed that the local land charges (LLC) register had not been updated to show the existence of the Council’s remedial notice. In the absence of any information from the Council to suggest otherwise, Mr Q was of the view that no appeal had been submitted in respect of the remedial notice, and therefore the Council ought to be enforcing the conditions of this.
6. This prompted Mr Q to makes enquiries with the Council which confirmed the process had been suspended on account of his neighbour having filed an appeal. The Council confirmed that the LLC was registered with HM Land Registry in December 2024. Due to having not received any information in respect of the appeal from the Planning Inspectorate, Mr Q made information requests to the Council which confirmed no record of an appeal having been made.
7. Under the High Hedges (Appeals) (England) Regulations 2005 when an appeal is submitted, a council must send the Planning Inspectorate the name and details of every person involved (other than the person appealing), Mr Q being such a person. On receipt, the Planning Inspectorate then notifies all parties as to the appeal and process. I recognise Mr Q felt an appeal had not yet been made due to an information request he sent the Planning Inspectorate confirming no record of this. However, Mr Q’s name had not yet been confirmed by the Council and so there would be no record of an appeal by reference to his name. Nevertheless, under the Regulations, and updated Guide for Appellants High Hedge (March 2021), an appeal had been made. The process allows an appellant to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate directly, bypassing the Council initially.
8. As I understand, the Planning Inspectorate confirmed the appeal to Mr Q in early 2025. I recognise Mr Q is unhappy due to an alledged delay by the Council in confirming the required information to the Planning Inspectorate, however we have no legal jurisdiction to investigate. This includes alledged non-compliance with the relevant procedural rules, and any injustice caused as a result, relating to the appeal process. These are matters for the Planning Inspectorate.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We cannot by law investigate this complaint. This is because the restriction I outline at paragraph three (above) applies.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman