The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with an application for outline planning permission. Mr X says the decision to grant planning permission was based on incorrect information and his objections were not properly considered. Mr X says the application includes works to his land which he has not agreed to.
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 Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council received an application from Mr X’s neighbour for outline permission to build a new dwelling. Mr X says the proposed development relies on the use of his shared driveway and says he has not given consent for the use of the land and the Council should not have given planning permission for the development.
However, it is not necessary to own land in order to make a planning application and planning permission does not override land ownership rights. It is not for the Council to get involved in land ownership issues and any disputes in this regard will be a civil matter between Mr X and his neighbour.
Mr X says the Council did not consider the issues he raised about the development. However, the case officer’s report referred to Mr X’s objections and addressed his concerns before deciding the proposal was acceptable in planning terms. I understand Mr X disagrees. But the case officer was entitled to use their professional judgment to decide the application was acceptable and the Ombudsman cannot question this decision unless it was tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered the application, it is unlikely I could find fault.
Mr X says the application should have been referred to the Council’s planning committee for determination. Councils delegate most planning decisions to their officers. The types of decisions delegated to officers are normally set out in a council’s constitution or scheme of delegation.
In this case, the Council says applications are referred to the committee if more than eight objections are received. As the Council received less than eight objections for Mr X’s neighbour’s application it was determined by officers using their delegated authority.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman