Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s conduct in dealing with related planning application and enforcement matters. This is because we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Miss X. Other bodies are also better placed to have considered any challenges to the information and statements the Council made.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to remove a planning Enforcement Notice (EN) from his land, its refusal of his Certificate of Lawful Development (CLEUD) application, and its pre-application planning advice. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s retention of the EN, or of significant injustice to Mr X caused by the decision, to warrant investigation. Mr X has the right of appeal against the CLEUD refusal, which it is reasonable for him to use. There is not enough evidence of Council fault in its pre-application planning advice process, or of injustice caused to Mr X by the advice, to justify investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not dealt properly with a planning application for development near her home. The Council is at fault because it didn’t consider the planning application properly and failed to acknowledge emails. The Council should apologise to Mrs X, consult with agencies about the drainage, and produce a report for the Ombudsman.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s enforcement action against Ms X’s neighbour for a breach of planning regulations. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has failed to take appropriate action to remove or replace his neighbour’s fence, which he considers is too tall. This is because the matter does not cause him significant enough injustice to warrant investigation and we cannot achieve the outcome he wants.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a certificate of lawfulness application. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We cannot accept complaints made in a person’s capacity as a councillor, and there is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice.

Summary: Mrs B complains the Council did not take enforcement action against noise and odour from a takeaway below her flat for several years. She says the noise prevented her from sleeping and eventually meant she had to sell her flat and move. The Ombudsman finds fault in the delay in the Council acting on a statutory nuisance and in its handling of the case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s decision to approve a planning application for a site close to the complainant’s home. We are unlikely to find fault in the process the Authority followed when coming to its decision.

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s delay in addressing a neighbour’s planning breach. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and while there has been some delay, neither it nor the injustice caused to Ms X is sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Ms X complains about delay by the Council in determining her planning application. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is a right of appeal to a Planning Inspector.

Summary: Ms X complains about the grant of planning permission for a neighbour’s extension. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s planning process. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and because Mr X had a right of appeal to the Planning Inspector. It was reasonable to expect him to use his right of appeal if he was unhappy with the Council’s decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a building control matter or concerns about the complainant’s council tax liability. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve the outcome the complainant wants and he could have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal.

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council decided a planning application for a development near his home. He said there was a conflict of interest, the Council failed to properly consider the impact of the development and its decision was flawed. We have not found fault by the Council in the way it determined the application.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decisions relating to development behind his home, which he said affects his amenity. We did not investigate this complaint further because we are unlikely to find fault, recommend a remedy or achieve any other meaningful outcome for Mr X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council breaching planning control. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a building control matter. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve a worthwhile outcome for the complainant.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: The complainant said the Council failed to properly consider his neighbour’s planning application for an extension which would cause loss of amenity to his property. We found fault but it did not cause the complainant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters relating to Ms X’s neighbour’s extension. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a boundary dispute when determining a planning application. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council handled the matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled the complainant’s planning application. This is because it would be reasonable to expect him to use his right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a building control matter. This is because we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mrs X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in relation to a development next to Dr X’s property. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council has reached decisions about planning matters. The Council has also apologised for delays in dealing with Dr X’s complaints about planning enforcement and this is a suitable remedy. Dr X has not been caused an injustice as a result of the Council’s actions in relation to building regulation compliance.