The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council processed a planning application. The Council refused the application. Therefore, the complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice.
The complaint
The complainant, I shall call Miss X, says the Council made multiple errors in considering a planning application and suggests it was predetermined to approve it.
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 any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement further investigation would not lead to a different outcome (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Miss X, and information available on the Council’s website.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council refused the planning application which is the subject of Miss X’s complaint. The Ombudsman cannot comment on alleged fault by a Council in an administrative process until there is evidence of a significant personal injustice caused to the complainant. As the application was refused we consider Miss X has suffered no such injustice .
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because she has not suffered significant personal injustice because of the Council’s actions.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman