Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to issue a CIL Liability Notice to Mr X’s company. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation. Also, Mr X had the right to appeal against the surcharge which is reasonable to have expect him to use.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council is demanding a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payment which includes surcharges. He says he was not told about the CIL liability before he bought the property and it did not show on the Local Authority Search completed during the conveyancing process.
2. He says as he was not notified of the liability until some years after completion he was not able to appeal against the liability.
3. Mr X wants the Council to cancel the CIL charge. If this is not possible the Council should:
• remove all surcharges and interest
• recalculate any liability strictly according to the Regulations; and
• allow him to apply for any reliefs or exemptions that would have been available had he been informed at the outset.

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.

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

5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
6. The Planning Inspector acts for the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about a surcharge (Regulation 117) imposed by the Community Infrastructure Levy collecting authority

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

My assessment

Background

9. The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a surcharge that councils can impose on new development in their areas. The surcharge only applies if the Council has a CIL policy, with details and rates on how the charge will be applied. Most new development that creates extra floor space of 100 square metres or more is likely to be liable for a charge.
10. Some developments may be eligible for relief or exemptions from the levy. Exemptions include developments built by ‘self-builders’.
11. It is possible to appeal against CIL charges, if:
• The claimed breach which led to the charge did not happen;
• The Council did not serve the CIL liability notice for the development; and
• The surcharge is incorrect.
12. CIL rights of appeal are subject to time limits. Advice on CIL regulations, surcharges and appeals is available on the www.gov.uk website.

What happened

13. In 2021 the Council planted planning permission for a new property. The planning permission document included confirmation that new properties will generate CIL liability and that a notice will be sent to the planning applicant. A web address was included so the recipient can seek more information.
14. In March 2021, Mr X’s solicitor has a Local Authority Search done as Mr X was buying the site. No CIL liability was noted. Mr X exchanged contracts to buy the site.
15. In April 2021 the Council served the CIL Notice on the planning applicant and added the CIL details to the Local Land Charges Register. A week latter Mr X completed his purchase of the site.
16. I understand Mr X says he did not know about CIL as it did not show on the property search and the CIL Notice was sent to the planning applicant – not him.
17. However, the CIL regulations require the Council to issue a liability Notice “as soon as practicable after the date on which a planning permission first permits development.” The courts have held that any delay must be in weeks or months, not years.
18. In this case the Council issued the CIL Liability Notice less than two months after granting planning permission.
19. I understand Mr X says the Council did not issue the Liability Notice to him. However, the Council correctly served the Notice on the person who applied for planning permission because no other party had assumed liability.
20. CIL Liability runs with the land, not the owner and the Council is not required to serve notices on subsequent owners each time a property is sold. The onus is on the purchaser to make themselves aware of any possible CIL liability. In this case the planning permission document refers to new properties being liable for CIL.
21. In 2022 the Council was advised development had started. It allocated CIL liability to Mr X’s company as the owner of the property.
22. In June 2025, the Council issued a demand notice to Mr X’s company. This included the CIL charge and surcharges as payment had not been made. In September it issued a further demand which included late payment interest.
23. We are not a planning or CIL appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which decisions are made. We look for evidence of fault causing a significant injustice to the individual complainant.

Back to top

Final decision

24. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because I have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council:
• added the CIL liability to the Local Land Charges register; and
• served the Liability Notice to the planning applicant.
25. Mr X had a right of appeal to the Planning Inspector against the surcharge. We are not an alternative route to remedy any matter that could have been determined at appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman