Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that a neighbour has failed to complete the building of an extension in time and in accordance with planning permission.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We 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. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X’s neighbour obtained planning permission for an extension in 2017 for an extension. Mr X says that the extension has not been completed as a wall has been left as a concrete instead of render and brick.
6. The Council advised in November 2024 that a Planning Officer had visited and agreed that the work had not been completed in accordance with planning permission. The Council has written to the neighbour advising that the work was required as a part of planning permission. The Council says that, if informal approaches are not successful, the Council will consider formal enforcement action.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Government guidance says: “Effective enforcement is important as a means of maintaining public confidence in the planning system. Enforcement action is discretionary, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control.” (National Planning Policy Framework September 2023, paragraph 59)
11. I am satisfied that the Council has properly investigated this matter and it has properly sought to remedy the matter informally. If no work is carried out the Council can then decide whether or not enforcement is expedient.
12. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether you disagree with the decision the organisation made.
13. I do not consider that there has been fault by the Council and the Ombudsman would not therefore investigate the matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman