The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning and enforcement issues at a property close to Mr X’s. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council has not properly addressed his queries concerning the completion of building works at a property close to his and that it has not taken enforcement action against a planning breach. He says it should ask the property owners to submit a retrospective planning application so that planning conditions which will benefit his property can be added.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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) 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))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained to the Council about the improper use of an outbuilding at a property close to his. He asked the Council to consider requesting from the property owner a retrospective planning application for the use and for any permission granted to include a condition relating to a boundary fence with which he is concerned.
The Council addressed the queries Mr X had about work which had taken place at the property and explained that officers had visited the site and were satisfied the use of the outbuilding was ancillary to the main domestic use of the building so that there was no planning breach and no grounds to seek a retrospective application. It further explained that even if the owner decided to submit an application, it would be unlikely that a condition about fencing would be attached.
It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants do not agree. We cannot question council decisions if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. While Mr X may be disappointed with outcome of his complaint to the Council, there is no evidence to suggest fault affected its decisions.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman