Report about garage dispute

A watchdog has backed Shropshire Council’s handling of a three-year neighbour dispute over the height of a new garage.

A householder, identified only as Mr B in the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s report, complained that his neighbour was building a garage bigger than the planning permission, granted in 2015, allowed.

The LGO report author notes that, during an enforcement investigation, Shropshire Council officers visited the under-construction garage and took measurements but did not share those with Mr B’s local councillor when asked.

The anonymised report says it would have been helpful and transparent to have provided these, but adds that, otherwise, “I am unable to find fault causing injustice in the actions of the council towards Mr B”.

In 2015, Shropshire Council gave planning permission for a larger garage, with a height of five metres, at a property behind Mr B’s.

The planning officer’s report at the time said “the proposed garage would not be visible from outside the site” and “the proposed windows would have limited impact on the outlook of neighbours”, the LGO document says.

Mr B didn’t object at the time, but did complain to the council two years later that the garage “was not being built in accordance with the approved plan”.

While that case was still open, Shropshire Council received a fresh planning application that would have authorised the new design, but that was refused in August 2017.

“Mr B contacted the council in late 2017 to complain the garage was still being built larger than the original approval,” the report says.

“He said the finished height would be over six metres.”

The council said the garage was being built in line with the original plans, and closed its enforcement investigation.

“Mr B queried this via a planning consultant and his local councillor, as he considered the height was unchanged and too high,” the report says.

“The council replied saying officers had visited the site, discussed the situation with the applicant and taken measurements.”

However, officers revisited the site in March 2018 and took more measurements “which confirmed the garage, now nearing completion, was larger than permitted”.

A third planning application was green-lit in August 2018.

“On August 9, 2018, Mr B complained about the approval process from 2015 to 2018,” the report adds.

The council replied on November 5, and apologised for the delay but, the report says, “could find no fault with the way it had dealt with each application”.

It adds the council “accepted the building had not been constructed in accordance with the first application, but subsequent actions and applications had rectified the issues”.

Mr B complained to the ombudsman.

The LGO report points out that Mr B did not object to the original, and his 2017 objection came while the enforcement investigation was already underway.

The successful 2018 bid “also added conditions to protect neighbours from further development or change of use, which is evidence Mr B’s objections were properly considered.”

The report says “it would have been helpful and transparent to have provided the measurements” when Mr B’s ward member requested them, but otherwise found no fault with the investigation process.