Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of its investigation into an alleged breach of planning control. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the matter.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement investigation into a fence erected by a neighbour.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included their planning enforcement and complaint correspondence.
4. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I appreciate Mr X is unhappy about the fence erected by his neighbour, and that the Council said it could not help him to get it removed.
6. But 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, and 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.
7. I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council investigated the issue Mr X had reported to planning enforcement, so we will not start an investigation. In reaching this view, I am mindful that:
• the Council visited the site.
• the Council’s view is that the fence benefitted from permitted development rights. As such, it was correct to inform the neighbour that no planning permission was required for it.
• any separate covenant on the deeds for the houses would be a private, civil matter, and is not something the planning enforcement team could be involved in.
• any concerns about encroachment onto, or damage of, Mr X’s land/property would also be a private civil matter.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council investigated the alleged breach of planning control.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman