Planning complaint transparency ...

No_worries

In 2016 we had an extension built, all legal and professionally done with architect, planners and building regs.  When it was finished there was a complaint which the enforcement officer said was 'mischievous' and he over-ruled it but it cost us money and delay.  The Planning Department couldn't reveal who had put the complaint in (data protection etc.)
Question: is there a legal time limit after which this information becomes available?

FreeBear

If they are using the GPDR to deny your request, then the information will never be made public in your lifetime. It is even possible that the file has been destroyed after 6-7 years.

BarelySentientAI

It was six years ago.  Move on.  You don't need to know who it was.

ThisIsWeird

There is a good chance it can be revealed if it's pertinent to a legal case. Say, for example, if you are having an ongoing issue with a neighbour, and this could be relevant to add weight to examples of anti-soc and vexatious behaviour, then I think it could be obtained.

Disclosing personal data in litigation

The 'legal proceedings' exemption is set out in paragraph 5(3)(c) of Schedule 2 of the DPA 2018:

1. The listed GDPR provisions do not apply to personal data where disclosure of the data -
   1. is necessary for the purpose of, or in connection with, legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings),
   2. is necessary for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, or
   3. is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights,
   to the extent that the application of those provisions would prevent the controller from making the disclosure.

The case that (may have) set the precedent: https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotSC/2023/2023_SC_DNF_7.html

No_worries

Thanks This is weird, I'll look at that link.  It's on behalf of another neighbour ...

Section62

No_worries said:

In 2016 we had an extension built, all legal and professionally done with architect, planners and building regs.  When it was finished there was a complaint which the enforcement officer said was 'mischievous' and he over-ruled it but it cost us money and delay.  The Planning Department couldn't reveal who had put the complaint in (data protection etc.)
Question: is there a legal time limit after which this information becomes available?

If the extension has already been finished then what was the delay?

A planning officer cannot "over-rule" a complaint or report of a suspected planing breach - they have to decide whether the report needs to be investigated, and if it does then decide whether or not a material breach has occurred.

The investigation shouldn't cost the person being complained about any significant amount of money, nor should it be a cause of delay to the project unless there was some justification for complaint.

No_worries

The extension was nearing completion, someone complained that the roof was higher than it should be (it wasn't) and we had to await clarification because in extremis we would have had to lower the roof apex ... thus delaying interior work until it was signed off as ok and clearly stressful that the roof may have to come off again.  It's possible that the complainant was by a disgruntled contractor ... as I said, the Planning Officer said it was mischievous ..

Section62

ThisIsWeird said:

There is a good chance it can be revealed if it's pertinent to a legal case. Say, for example, if you are having an ongoing issue with a neighbour, and this could be relevant to add weight to examples of anti-soc and vexatious behaviour, then I think it could be obtained.

Disclosing personal data in litigation

The 'legal proceedings' exemption is set out in paragraph 5(3)(c) of Schedule 2 of the DPA 2018:

1. The listed GDPR provisions do not apply to personal data where disclosure of the data -
   1. is necessary for the purpose of, or in connection with, legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings),
   2. is necessary for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, or
   3. is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights,
   to the extent that the application of those provisions would prevent the controller from making the disclosure.

The case that (may have) set the precedent: https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotSC/2023/2023_SC_DNF_7.html

Not sure that case is relevant to the OP's situation.

AIUI, that case involved a claim by one party that the data controller's release of information was harmful to them. The data controller used the defence that they needed to release the information (within the context of a legal process) in order to be able to defend themselves against a claim by a third party.

So the case would only be applicable if the OP's neighbour made a claim against the council and the council needed to release information about the person who made the planning complaint in order to be able to defend themselves against the neighbour's claim.

In practice the council's defence would probably be that they have a statutory duty to investigate reports of planning breaches, and that who made the report is largely irrelevant to their decision to investigate (to the extent that they did).  The claimant might ask for proof that a report/complaint was made (e.g. rather than it being a vexatious investigation by the council), but to do so the council should be able to provide only a redacted copy of the report/complaint - the personal information about the reporter/complainant is not germane, unless the claimant wants to risk upsetting the judge by futher claiming the council is falsifying evidence.

The more likely scenario is the neighbour taking some form of legal action against the reporter/complainant (e.g. a restraining order) - in which case the council would simply be a third-party rather than a defendant, and therefore I'm not sure the arguments in the case you linked to would still apply. I'm not a lawyer, but I suspect the council would resist naming the reporter/complainant until they were told by a judge that they had to do so.

Moreover, it isn't clear whether the OP's neighbour has sufficient proof it is the person they think who made the report/complaint to the council.  The report may have been made by an entirely different person - and unless that person in also included in the claim made by the neighbour then there's even less reason for the council to share their personal information with a third party.  I can almost hear the judge using the words "fishing trip" if they were asked to to make an order for the council to name whoever it was.

Ectophile

You (or your neighbour) would have to check if their specific complaint is timed out under the Limitation Act https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/contents  (That link is specific to England & Wales, Scotland and NI have separate leglislation, and the time limits are different).

chrisw

The enforcement officer has no idea whether it was mischievous or not. New building work often 'looks a bit high' if it's in a neighbour's line of sight. As said, it's been proved legal, move on.