Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council did not enforce planning requirements or provide a parking area. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to enforce planning requirements or provide an agreed parking area. He also said the Council failed to respond to his complaint properly.
2. Mr X said there is no safe footway, and he has to park in a less safe area due to lack of parking provision. He wants the Council to restore a footway in line with a planning decision and enlarge a parking area in line with a Traffic Management Order (TMO).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X said the Council failed to enforce planning requirements and reinstate a kerb/footway. In its response the Council said the work required a financial payment under Condition 16. It said it was liaising with the developers agency to confirm the payment.
7. Mr X said the Council had not provided an agreed parking area. In its response the Council said a TMO application is needed to commence work under Condition 17. It said it would ensure ongoing monitoring of the TMO and parking implementation.
8. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council identified learning from the complaint and said it would make service improvements. It said it would improve its internal escalation processed to ensure it actively tracks cases. It said it would strengthen oversite of planning condition discharge tracking, specifically when financial payments and physical works are required. It also apologised to Mr X and said it would reinforce protocols, so it can provide clearer updates to residents.
9. This is an appropriate response by the Council. Therefore, further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.
10. Mr X said the Council handled his complaint poorly. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman