The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application for development on land next to Mr X’s home. This is because the Council considered Mr X’s comments and obtained amended plans from the applicant to better reflect the boundaries between the properties.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council has granted planning permission for development on land next to his property even though the plans were inaccurate. Mr X says the plans included parts of his land. Mr X says this has caused him distress and unnecessary time and trouble.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and information about the planning application on the Council’s website.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council noted Mr X’s comments when it was considering the planning application. The Council asked the applicant to submit an amended location plan. The applicant submitted an amended plan and the Council granted planning permission for the development. Based on ariel photography and other images available on internet search engines the amended location plan shows a more accurate representation of boundary between Mr X’s property and the development site. Therefore there is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions and we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of faut by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman