Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement because the matter is out of time.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action in relation to a planning breach. 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 decision not to take enforcement action about the siting of an oil tank by Mr X’s neighbour. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council not assessing the visual impact of a development on her property, changing the colour of tall structures on the site after granting consent, and not being clear on what will happen with the development site in future. There is insufficient significant personal injustice caused to Mrs X by the outcome of the Council’s planning fault to warrant us investigating. There is no worthwhile outcome investigation could achieve for her not having her opinions properly considered in the planning process and being let down by officers. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s response to her concerns about the site’s future to justify us investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s consideration of bats when dealing with a planning application for a residential development near his property. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s or planning committee’s decision-making processes, nor significant personal injustice caused to Mr X by the matter, to warrant us investigating. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks from his complaint.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s grant of planning permission as there is insufficient injustice caused to the complainant to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a planning enforcement notice and the Council’s information-sharing practices. It is reasonable for Mr X to use his right to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to grant planning permission for roller shutters for his business. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. This is because there is no worthwhile outcome we could achieve for Ms X at this time. The issues Ms X has raised do not amount to fault warranting investigation or cause her significant injustice as the Council has not yet decided whether to grant planning permission.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a possible breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council. The complainant has also not suffered any significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement notices. Mr X used his right to appeal to a government minister, and as such we have no jurisdiction to investigate the matter.

Summary: Mr X complained the Building Control Partnership, acting on behalf of the Council, gave misleading advice and instruction resulting in additional and unnecessary work being completed. We have only found fault with the Council’s record keeping and some of its communications. To remedy the injustice caused to Mr X, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a modest payment. We are unable to make findings on parts of Mr X’s complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint that they were misled about the costs of varying a planning condition by the Council and the Planning Portal. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and we have no power to consider any complaint about the Planning Portal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council deciding not to take enforcement action in relation to the boundary wall built by a developer for the complainant’s home. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decisions, and it has apologised for associated errors in its communications with the complainant.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting planning permission for a new house next to the complainant’s property, and its subsequent actions relating to the implementation of the development. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner about the planning application decision, and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in respect of the more recent events.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find 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: 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 the Council’s consideration of a planning application as there is no evidence of fault.

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