Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve planning permission. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it made that decision to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve planning permission for a local business (the Business). He said the Business was not complying with existing planning conditions. He is unhappy about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action around this. He said the Business was having a negative affect on the local area. Mr X wants the Council to prosecute the Business for breach of planning conditions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In its response to Mr X’s complaint, the Council confirmed it was investigating the Business for breach of existing planning conditions. It said if it had enough evidence of a breach, it would prepare a prosecution notice. It explained that enforcement action was separate to the planning process, which it had to make decisions on within a set timeframe.
7. Although Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s response, we will not investigate. In respect of the planning application, the Council publicised this correctly and consulted with relevant departments. It wrote a report making recommendations on the application. That report considered objections raised, including those of Mr X. The Council’s Planning Committee considered that report and additional representations. The Council followed the correct steps in considering the application.
8. The Council has statutory timeframes for making planning decisions. It has confirmed it is actively investigating the Business and considering whether to take enforcement action. That enforcement action does not prevent the Council for considering and approving new planning applications. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council considered the planning application to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman