Added on 30/12/2011Ombudsmen Case

UK Local Government Ombudsmen - Complaint Summary


Warrington Borough Council (02/C/6932)


Consideration/neighbour amenity

‘Mr Adam’ (not his real name) bought his house following an assurance (a Section 52 Agreement) by the Council that the land immediately in front of it, a woodland area with several mature trees, was protected “in perpetuity” from development.

Mr Adam complained that the Council failed to take action when one of the trees, a magnificent copper beech subject to a tree preservation order, was felled, and when the Council later granted planning permission to develop the site, contrary to the Section 52 Agreement which protected it from development and contrary to all previous decisions by the Council and by the Secretary of State on appeal. The Council did not consult Mr Adam nor did it take any account of his interests before discharging the Section 52 Agreement.

The Ombudsman found maladministration leading to injustice. Although the felling of the copper beech happened too long ago for her to take action, she found that members were given misleading information when asked to consider the planning application for development of the site and that, had they been given a fairer picture, it would have been refused. She also considered that the officer’s report to the Planning Committee had muddled the planning issues and the Section 52 issues. The Council had failed to grasp the distinction between the two: there was no basis in law for its belief that consent for the former should necessarily lead to the discharge of the latter.

The Ombudsman recommended that the Council should compensate Mr Adam by paying him a sum equivalent to the difference between the value of his property today and the value it would have had if the land in front had not been and would not in future be developed, the valuations to be undertaken by the District Valuer. In addition, the Ombudsman recommended that the Council should pay Mr Adam £500 to compensate him for the time and trouble of bringing his complaint to her.

3 November 2003




Although the above information is deemed to be true and correct, it is possible that errors may exist, henceforth the AIE can not accept any responsibility for any action which may arise from its use. It is recommended that prior to using such information for legal purposes or when instigating any kind of legal action, advice be first sought from a solicitor. Please read our Terms of Use.