The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr & Mrs B complain about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission on a site close to their home. They also complain about use of the bridleway which runs through their property. We will not investigate this complaint. Their complaint about the planning permission is late. Concerns about the extent and use of the bridleway are civil matters and it is reasonable to expect Mr & Mrs B to ask the courts to consider these issues.
The complaint
The complainants, I shall call Mr & Mrs B, complain the Council: Failed to act on illegal traffic on bridleway running through their land Granted planning permission for 17 industrial units next to a Site of Special Scientific Interest Failed to take planning enforcement action against breaches of planning control Allowed their trucks to use the bridleway without checking ownership; and Is biased against a third party Mr & Mrs B want the Council to: Review the planning permission for the industrial units Visit the site Allow them to install a barrier to stop vehicles while allowing pedestrians and horses Believe their measurements of the extent of the bridleway; and Compensate them for loss of earnings and devaluation of their property
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended) The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered: information provided by Mr & Mrs B and the Council the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Mr & Mrs B’s comments on the draft version of this decision
My assessment
The Council received an application for the change of use of buildings to commercial uses under B2 General Industrial and B8 Storage & Distribution – retrospective application (amended description).
The Council’s Planning Committee considered the application. The Committee report includes the reasons for granting permission despite previous refusals. The published meeting minutes show the application was debated before approval was granted in 2020.
The law says a complaint must be made to us within 12 months of the complainant becoming aware of the matter. In this case Mr & Mrs B knew when planning permission was granted. Therefore, this part of the complaint is late. I have seen no reason to exercise discretion on this point.
Mr & Mrs B asked the Council to stop allowing its trucks to drive on the bridleway.
The Council investigated this point.
It confirms it is an offence to drive a vehicle on a public bridleway without authority. The owner of the industrial units told the Council they have a private vehicular right of way over the bridleway.
The Council acknowledged highways waste material had been deposited at the nearby site as it understood the owner of the site had vehicle access rights over the bridleway. However, it confirms it is now aware of disputed rights of access and its workforce and contractors have been instructed not to deposit any waste at or in the vicinity of the site.
The Council believes its use of the bridleway was lawful and Mr & Mrs B have not provided evidence of damage. Therefore, it will not pay compensation. The Council apologised for the delay in responding to this part of the complaint.
Mr & Mrs B erected a post which they say marks the edge of the bridleway. The Council says the extent of the bridleway is boundary to boundary unless Mr & Mrs B can provide evidence to the contrary.
Mr & Mrs B asked the Council to agree to a barrier across the bridleway to prevent use of vehicles but allows horses & walkers. The Council confirms it must consult with all those who have a claim for vehicular rights before giving permission for a gate.
Neither the Ombudsman nor the Council can determine disputed access rights or property boundaries. Nor can we decide whether the Council is liable for damages. These are civil matters for the courts, and it is reasonable to expect Mr & Mrs B to ask the courts to consider this part of their complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because: Part of the complaint about planning permission is late and we have seen no reason to exercise discretion on this point.
We cannot determine boundaries or access rights and it is reasonable to expect Mr & Mrs to ask the courts to consider these points.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman