Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Braintree District Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 21-012-844 Sector Planning Category Planning Applications Decided 26 January 2022

View Braintree District Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

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 no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for her neighbour’s extension. She says the extension is too close to her property and will overlook her garden. She is also concerned about its impact on her tree and raises concerns about her boundary.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended) We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Mrs X raises a number of concerns relating to her boundary and the Party Wall Act 1996 but these are not planning matters and the Council has no power to resolve them. If Mrs X believes her neighbour has encroached onto or damaged her property, and if they have not complied with the Party Wall Act, she may wish to seek legal advice about the possibility of a claim against her neighbour.

Overbearing and overlooking are material planning considerations but the evidence shows the Council took these into account when reaching its decision to grant planning permission. It also carefully considered the impact of the development on Mrs X’s tree. While Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s view on these issues I have seen no evidence of fault in the way it reached its decision; we cannot therefore criticise it.

Final decision

We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Braintree District Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-019-787 Other
25-018-590 Other
25-003-355 28 Jul 2025 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of a planning application. This is because the substantive … Other
25-004-807 17 Jul 2025 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the … Other
24-011-446 29 Jun 2025 Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his housing application. We found fault by the Council that caused … Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation