The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s application to discharge planning conditions. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. The complainant has not suffered significant injustice in relation to the remaining issues complained about.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with his applications to discharge planning conditions. Mr X says the Council should have sought further information in relation to one of the conditions sooner and the conditions should have been discharged without him having to make a second 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.
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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (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
Mr X could have appealed to the Planning Inspector if he was unhappy with the Council’s decision to refuse to discharge the planning conditions.
I consider it would have been reasonable for Mr X to have used his right to appeal.
The Ombudsman will not usually investigate when someone had a right to appeal to the Planning Inspector, even if the appeal would not address all the issues complained about.
Mr X has also complained about how the Council dealt with his second application to discharge the planning conditions. He says the response from the Council’s tree officer was inconsistent as the officer objected to the second application but did not raise any concerns when the first application was considered. However, I cannot say Mr X has suffered any significant injustice in this regard as the planning conditions were discharged.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he could have appealed to the Planning Inspector against the Council’s decision not to discharge the planning conditions. Mr X has not suffered significant injustice in relation to the remaining issues complained about.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman