Summary: Ms C complained about the Council’s handling of a planning application and related enforcement action for a development near her home. She said she experienced an impact on her residential amenity and facilities were not available to local residents as required. We have not found fault in the processes the Council followed to reach its views on the enforcement concerns. Nor was it at fault for how it communicated with Ms C or the delays which occurred. In addition, some parts of Ms C’s complaint were late and therefore not investigated.

The complaint

1. Ms C complained about the Council’s handling of a planning application near her home and related enforcement action. This included:
• its approval of a planning application for a small housing development in 2021, a section 106 agreement approved in 2022, and her planning enforcement concerns about what had been developed up to January 2024;
• concerns about development which had taken place since January 2024 and an unauthorised change of use; and
• its delayed handling of enforcement for a breach of condition of the planning approval which required a community building and facilities to be available to the public.
2. Ms C said, as a result, she had an impact on her residential amenity and facilities which should be available to her and the public are not available.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. Ms C’s complaint includes events and decisions which occurred several years ago. However, she first brought her concerns to the Ombudsman’s attention in Autumn 2025. Any part of her complaint before Autumn 2024 is therefore late. I have considered whether to exercise my discretion to consider parts of her complaint which were late. I will:
• not consider the Council’s approval of the 2021 planning application, the approval of the related section 106 agreement, its approval of a section 73 variation to the proposed development in early 2024, or her planning enforcement concerns from before January 2024. This is because I have seen no good reason such concerns could not have been brought to our attention sooner. I was also mindful the majority of the development Ms C raised concerns about was found acceptable by the Council’s planning committee.
• consider the Council’s handling of Ms C’s planning enforcement concerns relating to the community facilities and a breach of condition from January 2024 until December 2025.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Ms C and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Ms C and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

Planning permission

10. Councils should approve planning applications in line with their local development plan, unless material planning considerations suggest otherwise.
11. Material planning considerations may include:

• Access to the highway;
• Protection of ecological and heritage assets; and
• The impact on neighbouring amenity.

12. Material planning considerations do not include:

• Views from a property;
• The impact of development on property value; and
• Private rights and interests in land.

13. Councils may impose planning conditions to make development acceptable in planning terms. Conditions should be necessary, precise, enforceable and reasonable in all other regards.

Planning Use Classes

14. Planning uses of land or ‘use classes’ are set out in regulations. They cover a range of typical uses, like residential, business, industrial and commercial. Some uses do not fit within the use classes and planners refer to these as ‘sui generis’ which means ‘of its own kind’ or ‘unique’.
15. Planning permission is usually needed to change a use from one class to another. Whether a change of use has occurred is a matter of ‘fact and degree’ for the Council to decide.

Enforcement

16. Councils can take enforcement action if they find a breach of planning rules. However, councils should not take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
17. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. When deciding whether to enforce, councils should consider the likely impact of harm to the public and whether they might grant approval if they were to receive an application for the development or use.
18. As planning enforcement action is discretionary, councils may decide to take informal action or not to act at all. Informal action might include negotiating improvements, seeking an assurance or undertaking, or requesting submission of a planning application so they can formally consider the issues.
19. Government guidance says: “Effective enforcement is important as a means of maintaining public confidence in the planning system. Enforcement action is discretionary, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control.” (National Planning Policy Framework December 2024, paragraph 60)

Council’s Enforcement Policy

20. The Council says it will consider reports of planning enforcement concerns by acknowledging requests within five working days. It will carry out site inspection in accordance with priority which depends on the impact the alleged breaches may have.
21. It will keep complainants informed at key stages of the process and notify all parties when its investigation is complete.

What happened

Background

22. This is intended to be a brief summary of the key events and issues. It is not a detailed description of everything which happened.
23. In early 2022 the Council approved a planning application for a development of houses in the area where Ms C lives. The land included a community facility. A condition was set out in the planning approval to require community access to the private facilities which should be set out in a community use agreement.
24. Ms C raised various planning enforcement concerns to the Council about the development which she said was not in line with the approved plans. She said this impacted on her residential amenity.
25. By 2023 the developer submitted a variation application to regularise what had been built and some development which was yet to be completed. The Council’s planning committee considered the proposal, including comments from Ms C, in early 2024 and approved the variations.
26. The developer submitted a community use agreement to the Council in 2023, which was required by condition in the planning approval.
27. In Autumn 2023 the Council opened a planning enforcement case regarding the use of the community facility. This was because the developer may had changed the use, which would require planning approval. Ms C and other residents also informed the Council there was no access to facilities for the local community as required.
28. The Council informed the developer of the potential breach of condition. It decided to work with the developer to ensure the use remained as authorised and seek amendments to the community use agreement to ensure the facilities were available to local residents.
29. The Council provided updates to local residents Autumn and late 2023. It explained it could not enforce the community use agreement until an agreement was in place.
30. The Council also dealt with several other planning enforcement concerns regarding the development but found these had been addressed through the Section 73 variation approval. It also actioned some other minor development, which the developer corrected to its satisfaction.
31. The finalised community use agreement was provided by the developer and agreed in Autumn 2024. This set out the method and times residents in the local community could book to use the facilities available and how the facilities would be marketed.
32. The Council subsequently considered whether it should take enforcement action against the use of the development and whether the community use agreement was being adhered to by the developer. In doing so, it:
• asked Ms C and local residents to book the facilities and report any issues with access. Limited evidence was provided to the Council;
• discussed concerns with the developer regarding works, maintenance, and use of the facilities;
• visited Ms C’s property to assess and understand her concerns;
• provided a further update to local residents in January 2025 about enforcement for the site, including the community use. It again asked for evidence of restrictions to access for the community facilities;
• attended the site and met with Ms C and residents in Spring 2025;
• provided a further update to local residents in Summer 2025 about enforcement for the site, including the community use. It explained as it was a private facility it could not require specific hours, or limit costs for use and memberships. However, it asked the developer to address concerns about parts of the facility which needed improvement works; and
• responded to Ms C’s emails and discussed the case, its decisions, and expected progress with her in Autumn 2025.
33. In Autumn 2025 the Council found there had been a change of use for the community facility building which would require a planning application for it to consider the change of use. It informed the developer and set deadlines for this to take place.
34. The Council has since received a pre-application advice request from the developer. The Council said it intended to respond in early 2026. It explained, if:
• the developer subsequently submits a planning application for the change of use, and the Council approves this, no further enforcement action will be taken; or
• the developer does not submit a planning application for the change of use, or the Council refuses the application, it will consider what action is proportionate and expedient in the circumstances.

Ms C’s planning enforcement concerns and complaint

35. Ms C has since 2023 continued to raise planning enforcement concerns to the Council about the development, use of the development, and community access to the facilities. She is unhappy about the Council’s handling of:
• its approval of the planning application for the development in 2021, a section 106 agreement approved in 2022, and her planning enforcement concerns about what had been developed up to January 2024;
• concerns about development which had taken place since January 2024 and an unauthorised change of use; and
• its delayed handling of enforcement for a breach of condition of the planning approval which required a community building and facilities to be available to the public.
36. She also said the Council did not properly communicate with her throughout the process and is concerned the Council may approve the change of use.
37. The Council has responded to a significant amount of communication from Ms C, provided update letters to the local residents, and Ms C’s concerns about its handling of her planning enforcement concerns. On each occasion it has explained reasons why it may or may not take action, and how it intended to progress concerns or the identified breaches.
38. Ms C asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint.

Analysis and findings

Planning enforcement concerns since 2024

39. I have not found fault in the process the Council followed to reach its views on the planning enforcement concerns it received from Ms C and other residents. This is because it:
• acknowledged and considered each of the concerns it received;
• several concerns related to enforcement matters which had been approved through the Section 73 variation in early 2024; and
• more recent concerns had either been addressed or the Council found it would not be proportionate to enforce; and
• it informed Ms C and other resident in relatively regular updates.
40. I acknowledge Ms C is not happy with the decisions the Council reached in relation to the planning permission or that what had been developed was acceptable. However, without fault in the process, I cannot criticise the decisions the Council reached.

Planning enforcement of the breach of condition

41. The planning approval set out a condition for the developer to ensure the local community had access to the private facilities. This should be set out in a community use agreement.
42. It is clear there were delays for the finalised version of the community use agreement to be in place. This is because it was not until Autumn 2024 this occurred. However, I am not satisfied this was due to fault by the Council, nor that it was at fault for failing to take enforcement action for a breach of condition.
43. The Council considered the concerns about the lack of community use agreement in 2023. The developer subsequently issued a proposed agreement. However, the Council decided to work with the developer to make the agreement more acceptable and in line with what was intended in the condition. It was satisfied the community use agreement was appropriate in Autumn 2024. While this may have delayed access to the facilities for local residents, I found this was not due to fault by the Council. Nor could the Council dictate the hours and availability to the public for the use of the privately owned facilities.
44. The Council subsequently considered whether the developer was in breach of the community use agreement in place. I have not found fault in how the Council considered the allegations of breaches of the agreement. This is because:
• it asked Ms C and local residents to provide evidence they were unable to book or gain access to the facilities. It considered the limited evidence it received;
• it inspected the site and facilities;
• it considered the steps taken by the developer to offer or promote the facilities. It explained details were available for the local residents to book or make enquiries for the facilities. However, it did discuss some potential improvements with the developer; and
• it found no action could or should be taken at the time.
45. However, the Council did identify there had been a change of use of the building in Autumn 2025. I acknowledge Ms C believes this was clear from the outset. However, I have not found the Council caused delays in reaching its decision. This is because it required evidence to enable it to reach its view such change of use had taken place.
46. I understand the Council has since informed the developer a planning application is required for it to consider whether the change of use is acceptable. The developer confirmed its intention to submit an application to the Council.
47. I acknowledge the Council was yet to receive an application from the developer or decide whether to take enforcement action by the end of 2025. However, I have not found this was due to fault or delay by the Council. This is because the developer sought pre-application advice from the Council, which is common and acceptable practice within the planning system. The Council has confirmed it will provide its advice and it subsequently expects to receive a planning application for it to consider. If it refused the application, or no application is received it will again consider whether enforcement action should be taken.

Communication with Ms C

48. The Council is not required to respond to each planning enforcement communication it receives about ongoing matters. In this case, it provided relatively regular updates in the form of letters to all residents, and it responded directly to Ms C regarding individual concerns on several occasions as well.
49. I have not found fault in how the Council communicated with Ms C or local residents. This is because it responded in line with its policy and provided updates of key events, which is what it would be expected to do.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman