Summary: We found some fault on Mr N’s complaint about the way the Council considered and approved a planning application for a development on recreation ground. The planning officer’s report failed to refer to the total number of parking spaces applied for, but this caused no injustice. The Council failed to follow its own complaints procedure. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s determination of 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 to suggest fault in how the Council considered the application is likely to have affected the planning decision, and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainants are seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions on a development opposite the complainant’s home. We have seen no evidence of fault in how the Council has decided there is no breach of planning control.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council publicised a planning application. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. Nor can we order the Council to reconsider an approved planning application.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve an application for a Certificate of lawfulness of proposed use or development for a property next to his home. We have not seen evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve an application for a Certificate of Lawfulness of Proposed Use or Development for a property next to her home. We have not seen evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a 2016 planning application for a development to the rear of Ms X’s property. This is because the complaint is a late complaint and so falls outside our jurisdiction and because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council in relation to its more recent response to Ms X’s concerns.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for the complainant’s neighbour. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed planning enforcement resulting in loss of privacy and distress. We find the Council at fault for its delay in addressing Mr X's complaint. The Council will apologise to Mr X and pay him £1000 for his loss of privacy and avoidable distress and £150 for his time and trouble in resolving his complaint.

Summary: We found no fault by the Council on Mr and Mrs J’s complaint about it failing to follow procedure and properly apply policies when granting planning consent to a neighbours’ extension. We are satisfied the Council properly considered the application.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s planning records. We do not consider the complainant has suffered sufficient personal injustice to warrant our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the planning advice service provided by the Council. 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 pre-application advice the Council provided, and we are satisfied with the actions the Council has already taken in respect of the refund of fees.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council consulted with residents about amendments to its draft Local Plan. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing the complainant an injustice. Other issues either happened too long ago, have been considered in court or should be raised with other bodies.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters relating to works to a property in Ms X’s locale which it decided were permitted development. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council decided a planning application for a slurry lagoon near to houses in his village. We found there was no fault in the way the Council decided the planning application.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council allowing smaller separation distances between a new house and the boundary with her property than was shown on a planning permission, and delay in it dealing with her complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s planning enforcement process to warrant investigation. We do not investigate councils’ internal complaints processes where we are not investigating the core issue giving rise to the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement matter. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council causing Mrs X significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the way the Council reached its decision on possible enforcement action for an alleged breach of planning control concerning her property. This is because any injustice stems from the decision itself and if Mrs X disagrees with any enforcement notice the Council issues, it would be reasonable for her to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with breach of planning control. This is because the complainant has the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to protect him from noise and odour nuisance from a business below his home. There was no fault in the way the Council made its decisions relating to Mr X’s allegations.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take enforcement action against alleged planning and building control breaches relating to a nearby development. He says the alleged breaches contributed to flooding in his rear garden. Mr X also complained the Council delayed or failed to respond to his correspondence about this matter. We find fault by the Council and recommend a remedy to address the injustice identified.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take enforcement action against his neighbour, who has developed and changed the use of the land, causing disturbance to his amenities. We decided not to investigate further at this stage, because the planning decision-making process is ongoing.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault. The complainant has also not suffered significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

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: Mr G complains about the Council’s decisions not to enforce breaches of planning control. The Ombudsman’s decision is there was no fault by the Council. The Council made decisions that were proportionate and evidenced. So they are not ones we can criticise.

Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to consider correct information before granting planning permission for a proposal near Mr X’s property. This caused Mr X an injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay Mr X £200 to remedy the injustice.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because it is not yet possible to determine if the complainant has suffered any significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control or a retrospective planning application. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council has not taken enforcement action against a neighbouring property for breach of planning conditions. He says this allowed regular noise nuisance from motor racing and stopped his business being able to operate. The Ombudsman does not find fault in how the Council considered and managed enforcement action.