Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for change of use to a house of multiple occupation. This is because further investigation is unlikely to find fault or lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for development of land near his home. We ended our investigation because we are unlikely to find fault or a significant injustice to Mr X.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss Q’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement matter. It is unlikely we would find fault with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action, and so we cannot criticise the merits of the decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that officers failed to ensure compliance and/or acted in conflict with the Council’s Local Development Plan. And that false information was presented to the Council to achieve planning permission. From the information we have seen we are unlikely to find fault which cause significant personal injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant a variation of condition permission to her neighbour. The variation allowed the neighbour to change a first-floor landing window and use clear instead of obscure glass. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its planning decision process to warrant an Ombudsman investigation. We also cannot achieve the outcomes Mrs X is seeking from her complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his planning applications. This is because Mr B had a right of appeal to the Planning Inspector and he could have put in a claim for costs. We find it was reasonable for Mr B to do this.

Summary: Mrs D complains the Council failed to take enforcement action against a breach of planning control or to respond to her complaint. We have found the Council failed to consider whether to take enforcement action, but this did not cause a significant injustice to Mrs D. Its failure to respond to a complaint caused her time and trouble and distress. The Council has agreed to acknowledge this by making a payment to Mrs D.

Summary: There is no fault in the way the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission for a new property to the rear of Mr and Mrs X’s home.

Summary: There is no fault in the way the Council reached its decision that a property in Mrs X’s area and did not require planning permission to be used as an HMO.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council made the complainant fix a wall which did not need repairs. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr B complained about the Council’s consideration of planning matters relating to solar panels and sheds he erected on his land. He considered the Council considered them on the wrong planning basis and charged him too much in planning fees. There was fault in the Council’s advice which caused injustice to Mr B. The Council will apologise and refund the extra planning fee paid.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint about its handling of a planning application for a development which involved demolition of a local heritage asset.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has failed to take full and effective enforcement action, from late 2016, regarding a nearby house built in breach of the planning permission. The Council has taken effective enforcement action. Mr X complains too late about the history of the case, does not have an ongoing injustice, and investigation will not result in a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council has dealt with numerous concerns he raised about the operation of a business close to his home. He also complains that the Council failed to make reasonable adjustments for him, breached his data, and failed to respond to his complaints. Mr X says this has badly affected his health, and he is scared to go out in case he is threatened by his neighbour. The Ombudsman does not find the Council at fault.

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

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms B’s complaint about a planning enforcement notice. This is because Ms B put in an appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to properly deal with a planning application for developing a site adjacent to his home. He complained the site levels were raised and it was unreasonable for the Council not to take enforcement action. We found there was fault because the site level changes were not picked up when the application was decided. On balance we did not find the outcome of the planning application would have been different. However, the Council agreed to review its processes and procedures and made a payment to Mr X.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council should not have issued a certificate of completion for his neighbours’ extension because it blocked his gas flue. He says he has not been able to use his gas supply and has had no heating for two years. We have discontinued the investigation because we cannot consider a complaint that has been considered in court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs Q’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application for a development on land at the back of her home. This is because the complaint is late.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s statement that he had implemented a 2017 grant of planning permission rather than a later, amended scheme. This is because the statement is from the planning officer’s report on an application which has been the subject of an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to enforce against a development across the road from her property, or the late complaint about the Council granting the permission. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in the way it reached its enforcement decisions to warrant our investigation. Even if there has been Council fault, the matters complained of do not cause Mrs X a sufficient personal injustice to justify an Ombudsman investigation.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council will not pay him his costs following an appeal to the Planning Inspector. We will not investigate this complaint because he appealed to a Planning Inspector and the costs award can be enforced in the courts.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a planning matter because it is made by a public body.

Summary: Mr C complained the Council failed to notify him about a planning application for a large extension near his property and failed to properly consider the application. Mr C says he lost his opportunity to make representations about the application and will suffer from an unacceptable development close to his property which will have a damaging impact on his light, outlook and privacy and which will cause noise nuisance from the use of a nearby fire escape and walkway. We have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action of an apology, £250, work to agree an enforceable condition for the use of the fire escape and improvements to its notification procedure are enough to provide a suitable remedy.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve his neighbour’s planning application. We stopped our investigation because there is no evidence to show Mr X was caused a significant injustice by the development or that the outcome of the planning decision would have have been different.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council treated him unfairly when making enforcement decisions in 2016/17. Mr X complains late and had a right of appeal to the planning inspector against the enforcement notice affecting his property.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission to build a school close to his home. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. The complaint is late, and the Council’s decision was subject to court action. This prevents the Ombudsman from considering the matter, even if it had been received in time.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate how the Council dealt with this complaint about a potentially dangerous wall or the complainant’s concerns about the Council’s complaint procedure. This is because it is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman could add to the Council’s response.

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. This is because he is unlikely to find fault by the Council and the complainant has not suffered any significant injustice.