Summary: Ms X complains that the Council has not published any authority monitoring reports (AMR) for the past six years. There is fault by the Council because it has not met its statutory duty to produce these reports. The Council should now produce the report for the present year within three months of the Ombudsman’s decision on this complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for his neighbour’s balcony. There is not enough evidence of Council fault in its planning decision process to justify us investigating, and we cannot achieve the outcomes Mr X seeks from his complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the planning application documents placed on the Council’s planning portal. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council considered a planning application. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council causing injustice.

Summary: We 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 it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s applications for a disabled parking bay or a vehicle crossover. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about the Council’s grant of planning permission for a neighbour’s extension. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement matter. This is because there is no evidence of fault in its approach. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to provide details of a previous application as it would be reasonable for her to take the matter to court.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that his neighbour’s outbuilding is exempt from the requirements of the Building Regulations 2010. This is because the matter does not cause him significant injustice.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to take planning enforcement action. We will not investigate this complaint because the injustice affects all or most of the population.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s pre-application planning advice and eventual decision to refuse his application. We do not find evidence suggesting fault with the pre-application advice and it is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal the decision to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: Mr C complained about the way the Council dealt with his application to regularise building works which he said led to an unnecessary application fee of £300. We found no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application for a development next to his property in 2018. The Council’s site notice meant it complied with notification requirements, even if Mr X’s notification letter was not delivered. There is no worthwhile outcome to be achieved by investigating the application’s notification process now. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s process to make its decision to grant the permission to warrant us investigating. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants from his complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council wrongly issued a completion certificate for works that did not comply with building regulations. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault or that an investigation would achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council notifying the complainant’s tenant about a planning decision. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate how the Council responded to the complainant’s concerns about development at her neighbours’ home. We are unlikely to find fault by the Council caused the complainant injustice that warrants our involvement.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint about a planning enforcement notice. This is because Mr B has appealed to the planning inspector.

Summary: Mrs B complained that the Council failed to provide pre-application advice to enable her to submit a second planning application after her first application was refused. She also said the Council delayed in responding to her complaint. We found the Council was not at fault in failing to provide pre-application advice. But there was a significant delay in responding to Mrs B’s complaint which caused her injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs B and make a payment in recognition of the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about objections to a planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our investigation.

Summary: We 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 we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about fault by the Council which led to Mr X’s neighbour being granted planning permission when the Council had intended to refuse it. This is because the fault has not caused injustice to Mr X sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council decisions on two planning applications for a property close to the complainants’ home. This is because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council affected its decisions on the applications.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s determination of his planning application. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: Mr X complains the Authority did not begin enforcement proceedings early enough against a nearby temporary campsite and says the Authority is wrongly allowing ‘moveable structures’ such as portaloos to remain on the land. We will not investigate this complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault or significant personal injustice to justify our involvement.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to approve her neighbour’s planning application without consulting her. We agree with the Council’s assessment that there was fault, but this did not affect the outcome. This meant there was no significant injustice to Mrs X because the planning application would still have been approved regardless of the failure to consult her.

Summary: Mr and Mrs B complained about the way the Council decided a planning application for development near their property: specifically, it recommended including a condition in the decision to reduce potential overlooking but did not include the condition in the planning permission, failed to publish the officer’s report on its website, failed to comment on the issue in a later application and failed to give a consistent and clear response to their complaint. We found some fault in the Council’s actions but did not consider it would have affected the final outcome. The Council has agreed to pay Mr and Mrs B £400 for their distress, frustration and time and trouble.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with breaches of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: Ms B complained about the Council’s handling of a planning application for houses behind her garden. She said there was fault in its process, and it wrongly approved the application in 2018. She also said the development was not built as set out in the plans and the Council failed to take enforcement action. As a result, she said she experienced distress, loss of privacy and the value of her property decreased. We found no fault in the Council’s enforcement process. It reached a decision it was entitled to make; we cannot therefore criticise the merits of its decision. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the 2018 planning application. This is because this part of her complaint is late.

Summary: We 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 we are unlikely to find fault. Issues regarding rights of access over land will be a private civil matter between the complainant and the developer.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his planning application. This is because it would have been reasonable for him to appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her concerns about her neighbour. This is because its actions have not caused her significant injustice. Any complaint about the Council’s actions as her neighbour’s landlord fall outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council has not taken enforcement action about changes to windows which overlook his property. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about obstruction of a turning area outside the complainants’ garage. We cannot provide a worthwhile outcome as this is a private matter between the complainants and the owner of the access road serving the garage.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application made by Mr X’s neighbour. This is because there is no evidence to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s pre-application planning advice service. Mr X did not apply for the service himself, so the Council had no obligation towards him. In any event, there is not enough evidence it was fault for different officers to reach differing views on the acceptability of the development. Mr X chose to withdraw his application before the Council decided it, but as only a formal planning decision, and if necessary an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate, can settle whether proposed development is acceptable, it would have been reasonable for Mr X to have the Council decide his application and then use that appeal if refused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council deciding to grant planning permission for development near to the complainant‘s home. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is nothing to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for development on his neighbour’s land. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s view on the impact of development on highway safety. This is because there is no evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council publishes documents relating to planning applications on its website. This is because there is another body better placed to consider the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in monitoring building regulation compliance at Ms X’s property. This is because the actions of the Council have not caused Ms X an injustice as it was not responsible for the quality of the work carried out.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for Ms X’s neighbour’s extension. This is because it is a late complaint. We will not investigate how the Council dealt with a later application to amend approved plans as the application was withdrawn so there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged failures in considering a planning application. This is because we cannot investigate a complaint about a service where the complainant has a right of appeal.