Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with the complainant’s concerns about a possible breach of planning control and building regulations. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained a staircase has been replaced at his property without building regulation or planning permission. Mr X says the development is too large for the space and causes access and health and safety issues.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X says the new staircase was installed by a leaseholder of his property without permission. However, I am satisfied the Council properly looked into Mr X’s concerns before deciding not to take further action.
7. A planning enforcement officer visited the site. However, they decided it would not be expedient or proportionate to take formal action as they said the replacement staircase had a satisfactory visual appearance and did not cause harm to the street scene.
8. I understand Mr X may disagree. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgment in this regard and councils do not need to take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control.
9. I am also satisfied the Council properly considered Mr X’s concerns that building regulations had not been complied with. The Council agreed a building regulation application was not made as it should have been before the new staircase was installed. However, it has since inspected the staircase and explained why it complies with building regulations and why further action would not be justified. This was a decision the Council was entitled to make. As the Council properly considered if further action was necessary, it is unlikely I would find fault.
10. Mr X says the structure was erected on his land without permission. But this would be a private civil matter between Mr X and his leaseholder.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman