Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council handled a neighbour’s development and planning applications. He also complains that the Council failed to keep him informed of the progress of his complaint. He says this resulted in stress and distress, and means he cannot enjoy his garden anymore. He says the Council has shown a lack of care and attention. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council.

Summary: Mr and Mrs B complain the Council has failed to take enforcement action against several breaches of planning control committed by their next-door neighbour. They also complain it took too long to deal with their correspondence about this matter, if it did at all, and the Council’s Planning Enforcement Team should not have been involved in the investigation of their formal complaint. The Ombudsman has found the Council was at fault for not maintaining detailed records of its investigation and for failing to deal with all of Mr and Mrs B’s concerns in a timely manner. It was also at fault for the way it handled their complaint about these matters. The main injustice caused by these faults has already been rectified, however we recommend the Council apologises to Mr and Mrs B to acknowledge the impact of its faults. We also recommend the learning points from this complaint are discussed at a Planning Enforcement Team meeting to prevent these faults from reoccurring. The Council has agreed to carry out these recommendations.

Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s handling of a planning application and its granting of permission despite having refused previous applications for a similar scheme at the same site. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and the impact of the development on Mr B will be limited.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application for a residential development. This is because the planning application has not yet been determined, so the complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice.

Summary: Ms C says the Council has been aware of planning and environmental health issues at a site adjoining her property for twenty years and has done nothing about them. The Ombudsman cannot investigate complaints made more than a year after the events concerned. Since 2017, the Council has investigated her complaints fully and professionally and has used the powers it has to compel the site owner and occupants to comply with the law. I do not find fault.

Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered taking enforcement action against a bar below Mr B’s property. There was fault in the Council’s communication about the enforcement with Mr B and Mr C, but the Council has already apologised for this.

Summary: Mr X has complained that the Council has failed to provide a brief relating to the work required to comply with the conditions attached to the planning permission for a detached house. There is no fault by the Council.

Summary: Ms B complains about how the Council handled a planning application to build a large garage close to her home. She says the garage will impact on her privacy and light, and overshadows her home. There was no fault by the Council. It properly considered the impact on Ms B when it granted planning permission.

Summary: The Ombudsman found fault on Mr P’s complaint against the Council about the actions of its building control team. The Council failed to keep proper contact records, failed to identify a failure to comply with Building Regulations during an inspection, and took 4 months to correct this failure. The agreed action remedies the avoidable injustice caused.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaints about the way the Council has dealt with her neighbour’s planning applications and her complaints. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council or achieve any more for Ms B.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaints about the way the Council has dealt with her neighbour’s planning applications. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs A complains the Council failed to properly consider a retrospective planning application for a garage because it did not take account of objections. She says this may cause problems due to flood risks and concerns regarding a sewer. The Ombudsman’s decision is there is no evidence of fault in the decision making.

Summary: Mr A complains the Council failed to notify him about amendments to a planning application in 2018. He says the Council did not follow procedures. The Ombudsman has not found evidence of fault by the Council and has completed the investigation and not upheld the complaint.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning matter. The complaint is late and the actions Mr X complains about have not caused him significant injustice.

Summary: The Council was at fault in failing to tell Mr X about development near his home. The Council would not have refused planning permission if the fault had not occurred. But, Mr X lost his opportunity to comment on the development. To put this right, the Council agreed to apologise to Mr X.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint alleging fault with its decision on a planning application.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint alleging fault with the Council’s decision on a planning application for development at a neighbouring property.

Summary: There was no fault in how the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission for development near Ms X’s home.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint alleging it was dishonest in its handling of a planning application.

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council considered a planning application for a site next to his land. The Ombudsman has stopped investigating the complaint because further investigation is unlikely to find fault or significant injustice to Mr X.

Summary: Mr X says the Council will not respond to his request that it acts against a vehicle repairer who uses the highway to conduct his business. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint because it is out of time.

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council has not enforced building control regulations against his neighbour. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has allowed an outbuilding with a verandah to have been erected by his next-door neighbour under permitted development rights when permitted development rights do not cover this feature. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because it concerns matters Mr X was aware of more than 12 months ago and so falls outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to take planning enforcement action against a neighbour’s shed. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs B complains about an extension and excavation to her neighbour’s garden. She says the works do not comply with the approved plans, but the Council has not taken enforcement action. She says the works have caused damage to her property. The Ombudsman does not find fault in how the Council responded.

Summary: The Council properly publicised a planning application. However, it did not properly record its assessment of the proposed development on the complainant’s enjoyment of their home, which was fault. This caused limited harm to the complainant.

Summary: Mrs Y complained the Council failed to properly consider her objections to her neighbour’s planning application and the officer’s report contained errors. She also complained about the Council’s response to her complaint. Mrs Y says she is worried about the effect the development will have on her house, both to live in and in value and feels she had to repeatedly take time to complain. We have found no fault in how the Council made its planning decision or its complaint response.

Summary: Mr and Mrs G complain about the Council’s decision not to notify them about, and then grant permission for, a proposed development by the owners of a property near their home. They also complain the Council took too long to investigate their enforcement complaint when the applicant did not comply with the condition attached to the planning permission. The Ombudsman has found no fault in the way the Council dealt with the planning application or enforcement complaint.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a large extension to a neighbour’s house. The Ombudsman found no evidence of fault in the Council’s consideration of the planning application in question.

Summary: The Ombudsman does not intend to investigate Mrs X’s complaint about new housing development next to her home. This is because the planning application was approved by the Planning Inspectorate which is outside our jurisdiction. Also we have not seen any fault in the way it discharged the planning conditions.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the determination of a planning application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way Council reached its decision on the application.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. The planning officer’s report shows the Council considered the impact of the proposal on Mr X’s privacy and we cannot question the merits of a decision properly made.

Summary: Mr C complains about the Council’s consideration of a retrospective planning application for change of use for paintballing. Mr C says he suffers from excessive noise and floodlighting from the site which also causes problems on the access lane. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Council in its consideration of the application.

Summary: The remedy offered by the Council for delay and failure to consult on amendments to a planning application seems appropriate. The complainants house is further away from the new house than the Council’s minimum separation distance so it is unlikely the Council would have refused the planning application.

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council has refused to take planning enforcement action against his neighbour for a new driveway. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council determined a planning application for a residential development, and handled the subsequent complaint. This is because the planning permission has not yet been issued, so the complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice as a result of the alleged faults.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not intend to investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. It is outside his jurisdiction as the complainant had a right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.