Summary: Miss X complains about the Council’s failure to take enforcement action. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault. Although we found no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action, we found that it did not correctly process and provide a response to Miss X during its complaints process. The Council have agreed to our recommendations.

Summary: Miss C complained about the Council’s response to her reports of breaches of planning control which she said meant she could not use and enjoy her property. We have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action of an apology, symbolic payment and timely decisions going forward provides a suitable remedy.

Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council responded to her reports of breaches of planning control at a neighbouring property. Mrs X said this caused her significant distress and resulted in damage to her property. We do not find fault with how the Council considered and responded to Mrs X’s reports.

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to take appropriate action following complaints she made about breaches of planning conditions at her neighbour’s property. We found there was fault by the Council that affected Mrs X’s amenity. We recommended an apology and a payment to recognise the impact.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case and subsequent planning application in connection with a development near the complainant’s home. There is mainly because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council handled the enforcement issues and related planning application.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council used public funds to help a developer satisfy pre-commencement conditions for a housing development in his locale. This is because the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction as it affects all or most of the people in the Council’s area.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to rectify his neighbour’s plans because the complaint is late and the issue does not cause Mr X significant injustice. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to take planning enforcement action because there is not enough evidence of fault and it is unlikely we could achieve any worthwhile outcome for him.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action in relation to a planning condition attached to a development in Mr X’s locale. This is because Mr X is complaining as a councillor and not a member of the public so the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council decided to grant planning permission for development of a site which shares an access with her property, and how it dealt with her complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s planning decision-making process to warrant us investigating. We do not investigate council’s complaint‑handling where we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a condition attached to a grant of planning permission which he believes is unfair. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning permission as the matter was considered by a Planning Inspector; a body which is out of jurisdiction.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning enforcement case. 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’s handling of her neighbour’s planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence to show any fault wrongly affected the Council’s decision to grant planning permission or caused Mrs X significant injustice.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council has not taken enforcement action against a business near to his property for breach of planning enforcement notices and statutory nuisance. He says there are regular fires, excessive noise and toxic fumes coming from the business, which have a significant impact on people living close by. The Council was at fault in how it carried out its planning enforcement and environmental health investigations and for how it communicated its findings to Mr B. This caused him distress and uncertainty about how the Council considered his reports. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr B, make a payment to him for distress and meet with him to discuss the findings of its investigation and whether any further issues at the site need to be investigated.

Summary: We found no fault on Miss T’s complaint of the Council failing to properly investigate and decide whether her report of a breach of planning consent needed formal enforcement action. It failed to make reasonable adjustments when alerted to her visual impairment. The agreed action remedies the injustice this fault caused.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not dealt properly with a planning application near his home. The Council is at fault because it did not advise him of the planning meeting, its communication with Mr X was poor and it didn’t not follow its complaints process properly. Mr X was unable to make representations in person and spent time and trouble raising issues with the Council. The Council has apologised, provided guidance to staff, revised processes and offered to pay Mr X £300 in respect of the distress and time and trouble he suffered. The Council should also provide training to staff about complaint handling.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning advice given at a meeting, because we are unlikely to be able to establish whether the Council acted with fault. It is also reasonable to expect the complainant to have appealed to the Planning Inspectorate if he wanted to challenge the refusal of his planning application.

Summary: There is no fault by the Council. The Council officers considered all the evidence from residents, professional consultees and the developer before making a decision to approve a Construction, Environmental and Management Plan. The Council made the decision not to take enforcement action before the Construction, Environmental and Management Plan was approved without fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve planning permission. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it made that decision to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to adopt or maintain an area along a stream near the complainant’s house. This is primarily because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner. There is also not enough evidence of fault by the Council in respect of the current condition of the stream area, we cannot determine if the Council has been negligent, and we cannot investigate the actions of the parish council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to ensure a health centre is provided within the complainant’s residential estate, contrary to the aims of the associated legal agreement. This is primarily because there is no realistic prospect of carrying out a sound investigation into events which occurred more than a decade ago.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a planning decision made by the Council. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault affecting the decision and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants, which is for a planning expert to review the case and determine whether the Council’s decision was correct.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with complaints about planning and enforcement matters. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s comments as statutory consultee on a planning application. The comments were made more than 12 months ago, and we have seen no reason why the complaint could not have been made much sooner.

Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council determined a planning application for a site near her home. She also complained about the Council’s consideration of her reports of breaches of planning control at the same site. We found no fault in the way the Council made its decisions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement as it has been made on behalf of a public body.