Summary: Mr F complains the Council gave him incorrect pre-application planning advice that he did not need to apply for planning permission for change of use of his property. The Ombudsman has found fault. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr F, which is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Summary: There is no fault in the way the Council considered the impact of an extension to an existing building on Mrs X’s home.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the closure of a footpath to a railway station. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council or achieve any more for Mr B.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault with the way the Council has made its decision.

Summary: Mrs X complains about the way the Council handled a planning application on appeal to the Planning Inspector. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because any injustice is speculative and Mrs X had the opportunity to put her objections to the Planning Inspector notwithstanding the Council’s actions.

Summary: Ms X complains about the grant of planning permission which affects the private lane which accesses her property. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient injustice to warrant investigation and there is a private remedy.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr C’s complaint that the Council lied about changes in law, was inconsistent when considering his planning applications and unnecessarily asked for further information. This is because Mr C appealed to the Planning Inspectorate and the Ombudsman has no discretion to investigate.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his planning application. If Mr X believes the Council failed to properly consider his application it would have been reasonable for him to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: Mrs X complains that the Council unreasonably granted planning permission for a neighbour’s extension which overlooks her property. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of injustice caused by Council fault.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint that it failed to take enforcement action against alleged breaches of planning control at a neighbouring development.

Summary: Ms C complains the Council wrongly issued a Building Regulation completion certificate. Ms C says the developer failed to install thermal insulation and damp-proofing or adequate noise insulation which means the property has issues of damp and is difficult to keep warm which exacerbates those issues which will be costly to remedy. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr C complains the Council has not properly exercised its building control functions. The Ombudsman has not investigated Mr C’s complaint further, because it is unlikely that he would find fault and Mr C has not suffered significant personal injustice.

Summary: Mrs Y complained the Council granted planning permission for her mother's neighbour to build a side extension. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s failure to control a neighbour’s development which has caused her harm. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and there is a private remedy.

Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a house which will overlook his home. The Ombudsman’s decision is the Council’s decision was not affected by fault so we have completed our investigation.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application for a development near the complainant’s home. The Ombudsman also will not investigate the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action for a breach of planning control. This is because he is unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application from his neighbour. This is because the complaint is late and there is no reason Mr X could not have complained to the Ombudsman much earlier.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the action the Council took in relation to a breach of planning control. This is because it is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault by the Council and the complainant could have appealed to the planning inspector.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council wrongly issued a completion certificate for substandard work carried out on a property he has since purchased. This is because we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about pre-application planning advice and about the Council’s handling of his planning applications. The complaint is late and if Mr X believed the Council failed to properly deal with his applications it would have been reasonable for him to appeal.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to take enforcement action against multiple breaches of planning control by developers, principally involving working hours, over four years. While not all the matters reported were breaches, many were, and the Council’s failure to escalate enforcement action, and its unjustified decision to designate Mr X as a vexatious complainant, caused him and his wife significant distress, a loss of quiet time, unnecessary anxiety and time and trouble. The Council will apologise and pay Mr X £2600.

Summary: Mr C complained the Council failed to respond properly to his report about an unauthorised veranda at his neighbour’s property. Mr C says he suffers nuisance and noise from his neighbour’s dogs as a result. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has failed to properly investigate or take action in relation to noise disturbance or breaches of planning conditions intended to safeguard against potential noise disturbance. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council has investigated Mrs X’s complaints of breaches of planning control or noise disturbance.

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for her neighbour to have decking in their garden. There was no fault in the Council’s consideration of the application.

Summary: Ms X complains about drainage problems caused by her neighbour’s building work. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs Y complains on behalf of a local community group about the Council’s actions in relation to the fencing of local playing fields. Mrs Y says that officers acted without transparency and neutrality and have allowed the leaseholder to unlawfully fence the site and damage protected trees. The Ombudsman cannot question the merits of the Council’s decision where there is no evidence of procedural fault.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because he is unlikely to find fault by the Council and the complainants have not been caused any significant injustice.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action for a breach of planning control. This is because part of the complaint is late, and the complainant has not been caused any significant injustice by the remaining issues.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr G’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a new factory near to his home. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and so an investigation is not warranted.

Summary: The Ombudsman does not propose to investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s charge for determining his planning application. This is because the complaint is late and Mr X could have tested the issue at appeal.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs Q’s complaint about a planning enforcement notice. This is because she has, or could have, appealed to the Planning Inspector.