Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning applications and an associated planning enforcement case relating to works near the complainant’s home. This is primarily because parts of the complaint are late, and there is not enough evidence of fault directly causing the complainant a significant injustice in relation to the more recent issues.

The complaint

2. Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of planning applications, and an associated planning enforcement case, relating to works at a neighbouring property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not directly caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

5. In relation to the first bullet point, our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
6. And with regard to the second and third bullet points, our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by the Council. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter. In the context of a planning complaint, we need evidence to show that, but for any alleged fault, it is likely the planning outcome would have been different.
7. We also cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
8. Finally, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issues.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered:
• information provided by Mrs X, which included the Council’s complaint responses.
• information about the applications, on the Council’s website.
• the Council’s advice note regarding the enforcement of planning regulations.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. I appreciate Mrs X is very unhappy about the works at the neighbouring property and I acknowledge the impact she says it is having on her family.
11. However, the 12-month time restriction (detailed in paragraph 7 above) would apply to the parts of the complaint about events/issues which occurred in late-2022/early-2023. Mrs X did not contact the Ombudsman until August 2024. I see no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate these ‘late’ matters now.
12. And in relation to the matters which Mrs X became aware of since August 2023. I considered there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council directly causing her a significant injustice to justify investigating them either. In reaching this view I am mindful that:
• If Mrs X believes the neighbour has caused damage to her property or trespassed on her land, then that is a private, civil matter between those two parties.
• Similarly, Party Wall matters are private, civil issues which the Council would not be involved with.
• The neighbour is using a private, ‘Approved Inspector’, to check the works are compliant with building regulations, so the Council is not involved with this aspect of the build either.
• 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. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. As planning enforcement action is discretionary, councils may decide to take informal action or not to act at all. Informal action might include negotiating improvements, seeking an assurance or undertaking, or requesting submission of a planning application so they can formally consider the issues. The Council was therefore entitled to invite the neighbour to enter into pre-application discussions and to submit planning applications.
• The current, live application was publicised in accordance with statutory requirements. We cannot hold the Council responsible for any errors or delays by Royal Mail in delivering the neighbour notification letters. Furthermore, Mrs X has been able to submit her objections to the application, which is yet to be determined.
• The primary purpose of the ownership certificate process is to ensure a landowner is aware when a planning application has been submitted relating to their land. Mrs X has therefore not been caused a significant injustice by the alleged irregularities in the ownership certificates submitted by the neighbour, because she was made aware of their applications and was able to submit her objections.
13. As we are not starting an investigation into the substantive planning and enforcement matters being complained about, it would not be a good use of our resources to pursue any associated concerns about the Council’s complaints process in isolation.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint primarily because parts of it are late, and there is not enough evidence of fault causing her a significant injustice in relation to the more recent issues.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman