Summary: Mr X says his neighbour has built an extension not following the plans and the Council has failed to act. The Ombudsman has not found the Council at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X objected to his neighbours planning application. The Council considered Mr X’s objections and refused the application. Mr X said he and his wife were pressured into signing an agreement retracting their objections by a Council Officer and a further forged letter was submitted to the Council to this effect. The neighbour put in a second application. Mr X did not object and the Council approved the application. Mr X says his neighbour (N) has not been built the extension in line with the plans and it is encroaching on his land. Mr X said this has affected his wife’s health, forced the family to not use their garden and has affected the value of the house. Mr X also says the Council delayed in dealing with his complaint and did not independently review the matter. He would like the Council to get the neighbour to move the wall to within their curtilage and repair damage to his property.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

2. Mr X complained the Council delayed in dealing with his complaint and did not independently review the matter. The Council apologised for the delay but the matter was otherwise dealt with in accordance with the Councils procedure. I do not consider it necessary to look into this further.

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 the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation I have considered the following:
• The complaint and the documents provided by the complainant.
• Documents provided by the Council and its comments in response to my enquiries.
• The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015.
6. Mr X 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

Planning permission

7. Planning permission is required for the development of land (including its material change of use).
8. Councils must publicise planning applications.  The publicity needed depends on the nature of the development and the council’s own policies. All applications must be published on the council’s website. In this case, the Council also had to do a site notice or neighbour notice.

The Neighbour Consultation Scheme / Householder Prior Notification

9. The Householder Prior Notification Scheme (‘the Scheme’), allows householders to build larger, rear single storey extensions.
10. The householder must tell the Council what their plans are and provide addresses of adjoining neighbours. The Council will consult with the neighbours. 
11. Neighbours may object if the proposals will harm their amenity. The Council must consider if the impact on the neighbour’s amenity is acceptable and whether to grant permission.
12. If no objections are raised, the Council’s prior approval is not required and the development can go ahead.

Planning enforcement

13. Councils can take enforcement action if they find planning rules have been breached. However, councils should not take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
14. 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. Government guidance encourages councils to resolve issues through negotiation and dialogue with developers.

What happened

15. I have summarised below the key events; this is not intended to be a detailed account.

16. Mr X lives in a semi-detached property.
17. Mr X’s neighbour (N) applied for Householder Prior Notification to build a single storey rear extension in April 2021.
18. The Council consulted with N’s neighbours, including Mr X.
19. Mr X objected to the application. The Council considered Mr X’s representations. In its decision, it said the extension would have an impact on neighbour amenity and refused the application in June 2021.
20. N had new plans for an extension. Mr X agreed verbally to the new plans, following a conversation with a Council Building Control Officer (BCO). Mr X said he would not object to the application on the understanding the BCO would approve previous building works at his property. This was followed by a written agreement to the new plans, dated early July 2021, which reads as though drafted by N. The document was signed by Mrs X. In conversation with me, Mr X said he thought either the BCO or N drafted the agreement. He also said the BCO pressured Mrs X into signing the agreement.
21. Mr X showed me a letter claiming to be from him and his wife which retracted their objections to the original planning permission. There was no signature on the letter. Mr X assumed N or the BCO wrote the letter.
22. In July 2021, N applied again for Householder Prior Notification to build a single storey rear extension to their property.
23. The Council consulted with N’s neighbours, including Mr X.
24. Mr and Mrs X did not object. Neither did any of the other consultees.
25. As the Council did not receive any objections, it did not need to consider if its prior approval was needed. The Council issued the decision notice in September 2021 and said the extension shall be constructed as per the details and plans.
26. N began building the extension.
27. Mr X contacted the Council and said N was not building the extension according to plan. He said N built over the party boundary and was encroaching on his land.
28. The Council’s Planning Enforcement Officer visited the site in May 2022.
29. The Council wrote to Mr X in May 2022 and said there had been no breach of planning control. The notes from the site visit said the extension appears built within the curtilage of N's property. It also states land ownership disputes are civil matters and not within the remit of the Local Planning Authority.
30. Mr X complained to the Council in June 2022.
31. The Council issued a stage one response in June and a stage two response in November 2022. The Council said there was no breach of planning control. It explained boundary issues are private matters and if Mr X believed N had built on his land, he should seek independent legal advice.
32. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman in March 2023.

Analysis

The planning applications

33. N applied to the Council for Householder Prior Notification in April 2021. The legislation states the Council must consult with neighbours; the Council consulted with neighbours. If the Council receives an objection, it must consider the impact of the development on the neighbour’s amenity and decide whether to grant permission. Mr X objected to the application and the Council considered Mr X’s representations and decided the development would impact on his amenity. The Council refused the application. The Council followed the process set out in legislation when it decided not to allow N’s original application for an extension.
34. N applied a second time to the Council for Householder Prior Notification in July 2021. As above, the Council consulted with neighbours, including Mr X. This time it did not receive any objections. As nobody objected, the Council did not need to consider if its prior approval was required. N was able to progress with the development. The Council followed the correct process as set out in legislation when considering N’s second application. The Council is not at fault.

Agreement with the neighbour and Building Control Officer

35. In correspondence with me, Mr X confirmed he did not object to the second application. He said he spoke with N and the BCO, and agreed he would not object, providing the Council did not pursue him for work on his property that did not follow building regulations. He agreed this verbally for ‘a quiet life’. If the BCO had not offered this deal, he said he would have objected to the application. The Council does not have a record of these conversations and the BCO no longer works for the Council. There is no way of knowing what happened. Neither does the Council have a record of the work needing building regulation certificates.
36. Mr X said the BCO pressured Mrs X into signing an agreement following the verbal agreement. I have not seen any evidence the BCO pressured Mrs X. There is not enough evidence, even on the balance of probability, for me to say what happened.
37. The Council did not receive a copy of the agreement signed by Mrs X. Neither did it receive a copy of the forged letter. The conversations and documents did not impact on the Council’s decision making when it considered N’s second application under the Scheme.

Planning enforcement

38. Mr X complained N did not build the extension in line with the plans and asked the Council to take enforcement action. The Council’s Planning Enforcement Officer visited the site and determined ‘the single-story extension has been constructed within the parameters of Prior Notification…. The extension has been constructed lawfully and a breach of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) has not been identified.’
39. Councils can take enforcement action if they find individuals have breached planning rules. In this case, the Council visited the site and determined there was no breach of planning rules. The Council did not need to take further action.
40. The Council are not at fault for not taking enforcement action. It correctly assessed the situation and decided there was no breach of planning control, a decision it is entitled to make.

Boundary issues

41. Mr X also complained N built part of the extension on his land. The Council told Mr X land ownership disputes are civil matters between landowners and are outside the Councils jurisdiction. The Council advised Mr X to take independent legal action if he considered N built on his land. The Council are not at fault as boundary disputes are not matters they can make a decision on.

Final decision

42. I have now completed my investigation. The Ombudsman has not found the Council at fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman