Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Maidstone Borough Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 22-003-330 Sector Planning Category Planning Applications Decided 04 July 2022

View Maidstone Borough Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council charging local people for pre-application advice about planning matters. This is because the law allows the Council to charge for this service and there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council has calculated its charges.

The complaint

Mr X complains the Council asked him to pay for advice about work he was doing to his home and whether planning permission was required. Mr X says this should be covered by his Council Tax payments.

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 the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

The law allows the Council to charge for certain services it can provide (Local Government Act 2003, section 93). This includes the provision of “pre-application advice” to members of the public about planning matters. The law says charges should not exceed the costs incurred by the Council in providing the service.

The government has produced guidance on charging for pre-application advice. This says that councils are “strongly encouraged” to provide a basic level of service free of charge.

The Council provides links to government websites about planning matters on its website. This includes information about permitted development rights. The Council charges the public for pre-application advice. The Council says that it has set its charges based on the costs incurred and that these costs exceed the amount it charges for the service. It says the charges are lower than charges made by other neighbouring councils for the same service.

There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council charging for pre-application advice. The law allows the Council to charge for this service and the charges do not appear to exceed the costs involved in providing the service. The Council also provides information on its website directing people to online resources which give free advice about planning matters including permitted development. Therefore we will not investigate this complaint.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Maidstone Borough Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-010-280 Other
25-019-245 Other
25-022-704 Other
24-022-332 05 Jan 2026 Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to process his planning application properly, causing delay, distress and financial loss. We … Upheld
25-010-250 17 Dec 2025 Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about Council tax arrears. We are satisfied with the action the Council … Other
View all decisions for this organisation