| BF>12.12.14 | Initiate Proceedings with Local Government Ombudsman by completing their Complaint Form on 12th December 2014 |
| 09.03.15 | The Ombudsman’s draft decision Summary: This complaint is not upheld. In 2013 a developer resumed building a boat shed for which he had planning permission and had started building in 2001. Local residents complained but the Council found the developer could still build the shed. However, he had built it almost a metre wider than he should have done. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with the breach of planning control and its decision not to take enforcement action. It kept residents informed throughout the process. |
| 11.03.15 | There is a glaring omission from the draft of the 9th March: There is nothing about the shelter being too tall. – replylgo11mar.pdf |
| 24.03.15 | The draft is amended by adding: “The complainant says the shed is also 3 metres higher than it should be. The Council says it is not. There is no fault in how the Council decided the shed is the permitted height.” to the summary. This is clearly wrong as the Council cannot provide any drawings or plans to support their argument. |
| 06.04.15 | An explanation of why I thought the Council were wrong in their assessment of the planned height was sent to Ombudsman. This was written before the significance of the switch over from complaint 248789 to 253539 was realised. Reversion Part II might be better clearer. |
| 31.03.15 | Email to South Shields MP. As I no longer lived in South Shields she declined to comment. Eventually with some help from the MP from Jarrow the MP for Berwick became involved and wrote on my behalf to the CEO of South Tyneside Council. |
| 15.04.15 | Explanation 06.04.15 ignored. The summary has been amended, ‘he had‘ to ‘the developer‘ but that was all. There is a very telling statement in her consideration of the complaint which shows that whoever was giving the Council’s side was not being straightforward with her. See LGO |
| 01.06.15 | The letter from the MP to the CEO was not specific about which end of the Shelter was which and I wrote to both to make it very clear which end had a planned height of 15.5m. The fall in gradient is about 3m and the shelter is built 3m too high and people have been known to exploit this concurrence to make claims that the shelter is not too high. |
| 04.08.15 | Note to MP: enquiring if there had been any response from Mr Swales, CEO, South Tyneside Council. |
| 10.09.15 | ST/0461/14/FUL resubmitted with amended drawings. Letter from Head of Development Services – there is no longer a Planning Manager for South Tyneside Council. The main difference to last years submission is the height of the second shed. It has been reduced by 3m and there are some interesting notes from the agent, Gary Craig. |
| 30.09.15 | Email to Gary Simmonette. Not answered |
| 04.12.15 | Email to Gary Simmonette. Not answered |
| 07.12.15 | Email to Gary Simmonette. Not answered |
| 09.12.15 | Email from Customer Advocacy. Your email of 4th December refers to not being satisfied with the responses to the second part of your earlier contact to the team on 30 September. This was regarding the planning enforcement aspect of the existing boat repair shed. This matter has been investigated fully by the Council through its corporate complaints procedure. The complaint was not upheld and was also considered and decided by the Local Government Ombudsman who found no fault with the Council’s decision.
What Mr Simmonette had failed to tell Customer Adcovacy was that the Council had taken no enforcement action over the shed in spite of being told that it was nearly 3m taller than planned and rather than take any action they had to eventually mislead the Ombudsman about it. |
