Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Cheshire East Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 22-007-066 Sector Planning Category Planning Applications Decided 12 September 2022

View Cheshire East Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in determining his planning application. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. The Council has now decided the application and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for Mr X.

The complaint

The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council has delayed in dealing with his planning application.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.

The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b)) The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about: delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission a decision to refuse planning permission conditions placed on planning permission a planning enforcement notice.

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Mr X applied to the Council for planning permission for a new dwelling in 2020. He says the Council has failed to determine his application and he cannot therefore proceed with the development.

The law says local authorities should issue decisions on applications for development such as Mr X’s within eight weeks. In the event they do not, the law provides a right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate on the grounds of non-determination (delay). So if Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s delay it would have been reasonable for him to appeal.

The Council accepts it took longer than it should to decide the application and it has apologised. But it has now issued a decision and it is unlikely we could achieve for Mr X.

Final decision

We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Cheshire East Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-018-231 Other
25-017-164 Other
25-002-898 Upheld
25-016-001 Other
25-021-726 Other
View all decisions for this organisation