Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s planning enforcement and planning application processes, and how it dealt with her complaint. Mrs X has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate against the Council’s enforcement notice and refusal of her planning application and we cannot investigate by law where someone has used those appeal rights. We do not investigate councils’ complaint handling where we are not investigating the core issues which gave rise to the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X built a garden structure and fence then sought to regularise the work. She complains the Council:
1. wrongly decided her development required planning permission and took enforcement action;
2. wrongly advised her to install a new privacy fence to offset the impact of the structure, which then also needed planning permission;
3. delayed in dealing with her complaint and gave complaint replies with incorrect information.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal or a government minister or started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended)
3. The Planning Inspectorate acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Inspectorate considers appeals about:

• delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission;
• a decision to refuse planning permission;
• conditions placed on planning permission;
• a planning enforcement notice.

4. The courts have said that where someone has used their right of appeal, reference or review or remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Mrs X, documents from the Council’s and Planning Inspectorate sites, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Councils officer considered Mrs X’s development caused significant amenity impact on the neighbour’s property. Officers issued an enforcement notice which remained in place. Meanwhile Mrs X made a retrospective planning application for the initial development as built. She also installed a fence to try to reduce overlooking impacts but it was taller than allowed without planning permission. The Council refused the planning application for the developments. Mrs X then submitted an amended application, proposing to reduce the size of the structure which the Council also refused. Mrs X appealed to the Planning Inspectorate against the Council’s enforcement notice and its refusal of her application.
7. The planning system as set up by national government includes formal appeal routes for planning applicants. We cannot by law investigate Mrs X’s planning applications. That is because Mrs X appealed to the Planning Inspectorate against the Council’s refusal decision. The use of that appeal takes the entire planning application matters outside our powers and we cannot investigate.
8. We note Mrs X disputes the Council’s assessment that her development as built required planning permission, which triggered officers’ enforcement action. But she appealed against the enforcement notice to the Planning Inspectorate, which dismissed the appeal and upheld the notice in 2025. As with her appeal against the planning application refusal, her use of that appeal takes the entire enforcement matter outside our powers and by law we cannot investigate.
9. We recognise Mrs X’s complaint raises issues about Council officers’ actions during the planning processes. Inspectorate appeals may not consider these issues. However, the courts have said that where someone has used their right of appeal, reference or review or remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we have no powers to investigate. The principle set down in this court judgement, as above in paragraph four, applies wherever a complainant has used a formal right of appeal other than through court proceedings, including Planning Inspectorate appeals. This limitation on our jurisdiction applies even if the appeal will not or cannot provide a complete remedy for all the issues raised. So we cannot investigate any part of the Council’s involvement in the planning matters here because of Mrs X’s use of her Planning Inspectorate appeal rights.
10. We note Mrs X says the Council delayed in dealing with her complaint and gave incorrect information in complaint replies. We do not investigate councils’ internal complaint-handling in isolation where we are not investigating the core issues which gave rise to the complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to do so. That limitation applies here so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• we cannot investigate where someone has used their appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate;
• we do not investigate councils’ complaint handling where we are not investigating the core issues which gave rise to the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman