Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council granted planning permission to his neighbour for the development of land they do not own. There is no evidence of fault by the Council and Mr X’s injustice results from his neighbour’s actions rather than the Council’s.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council granted planning permission for a change of use of land which is currently unregistered. He says he has maintained the land for 10 years and allowing his neighbour to claim it will result in wasted expenditure. He is also concerned about the impact of possible future works by his neighbour on the environment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint, shared my draft decision with him and invited his comments.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X says he has spent 10 years looking after trees and shrubs on an area of unregistered land at his own expense. He is unhappy the Council has granted planning permission for change of use of the area to residential, allowing his neighbour to bring the land within the curtilage of his property. He complains the Council did not properly investigate ownership of the land before granting planning permission and says the money he has spent on maintaining the land will be wasted.
5. The planning permission granted is for change of use of the land only and does not convey any rights of ownership on the neighbour which they did not have already. If Mr X wishes to dispute his neighbour’s claim to the land and to claim ownership himself, he may wish to speak to the Land Registry.
6. The Council properly considered the material planning considerations relevant to the neighbour’s application and it could not refuse it simply because Mr X considers they do not own the land.
7. Ultimately Mr X’s injustice stems from his neighbour’s claim to own the land and this is a private civil matter between the two parties.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and Mr X’s claimed injustice is the result of his neighbour’s actions rather than those of the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman