The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his neighbour’s planning application. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault affecting the Council’s decision.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of his neighbour’s planning application. He is unhappy about the impact of the development and that he did not have more of an opportunity to object to the proposal or to appeal against the decision.
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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The planning process and its requirements are set out in law. There is no right of appeal against a council’s decision for anyone other than the applicant; this is not the result of any fault by the Council.
The Council consulted Mr X on the application and considered the impact of the development on his property; there is no requirement for a site visit with neighbours as Mr X would have liked.
The impact of the development is a ‘material’ issue, meaning the Council can take account of this in deciding whether to grant planning permission. But other points raised by Mr X are not material to the planning process and the Council could not therefore have used them as a reason to refuse planning permission. The Council’s grant of planning permission does not supersede any private rights or restrictions and does not guarantee a person can or will implement the permission.
Mr X’s complaint to the Council included concerns over pre-application advice provided to his neighbour but this is not evidence of fault or bias in the process. National guidance recommends councils work with applicants to provide advice on proposals and deliver acceptable development and this is what the Council has done in this case.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman