Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against a caravan and platform installed by his neighbour. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its decision-making process to warrant us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X lives next door to a property where the owner has installed a platform in their garden and put a caravan on it
2. Mr X complained the Council wrongly decided not to take planning enforcement action against the neighbour’s caravan and platform.

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 cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X and the Council;
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code;
• the Town and Country Planning Act 1990;
• relevant online maps.
6. I also invited Mr X to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. When a council receives a report of a planning breach, it should gather relevant information then decide what to do. To decide whether they are able to use their enforcement powers, councils follow the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Section 171B(1) of the 1990 Act says where there has been work carried out without planning permission four years ago or more, and that work consists of building in, on, over or under land, a council cannot take planning enforcement action. Mr X’s neighbour’s platform is a building development on the land so would be covered by this section of the 1990 Act, and the four-year time limitation on enforcement action applies.
8. In making its decision about the platform, the Council considered the evidence of when it was installed. It viewed photographic records of the site and determined the platform had been in place for over four years. Officers reached the decision that they no longer have powers to enforce against the platform.
9. We cannot go behind a council’s decision unless there is evidence of fault in the officers’ decision-making process which, were it not for that fault, would have resulted in them making a different decision. There is not enough evidence here of such fault in the process followed by the Council, to make its decision not to enforce, to warrant us investigating.
10. Regarding the neighbour’s caravan, there is no requirement for planning permission to park a caravan in a residential garden, as long as it is used by the residents as a space additional to their main living accommodation. This is known as an ‘ancillary’ use. A caravan may require planning permission if it became the main or only dwelling on the land, rather than being ancillary. From information in Mr X’s complaint, it appears his neighbours use the caravan as additional living space while retaining the house as their main accommodation. Tere is not enough evidence of fault by the Council when it decided the caravan did not require planning permission to justify us investigating.
11. I understand Mr X believes his neighbour strung him along, knowing that after four years the caravan platform would not be enforceable. That would be unfortunate, but the Council is not responsible for what the neighbour said to Mr X. We can only consider how the Council dealt with the platform and caravan once Mr X reported them.
12. I realise Mr X disagrees with the Council and wants it to take enforcement action. But it is not fault for a council to properly make a decision with which someone disagrees.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s planning enforcement decision-making process to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman