Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to take enforcement action about a neighbour’s landscaping works. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to take enforcement action against a neighbour’s landscaping works and a fence exceeding 2m in height. He complains of the works causing water seepage into his garden.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action. Government guidance stresses the importance of affective enforcement action to maintain public confidence in the planning system but says councils should act proportionately.
6. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body against enforcement decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
7. In this case, an enforcement officer visited the site. It seems the Council accepted there had been a planning breach. However, it has now decided it would not be expedient to take enforcement action. And advised Mr X it considers his complaint to be a civil law matter between him and his neighbour.
8. The Council is entitled to use its professional judgement to decide enforcement action was not justified and councils do not need to take formal enforcement action just because there has been a breach. As the Council has considered if it was necessary to take enforcement action and informed Mr X of its reasons not to act, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman