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 there is not enough evidence of fault affecting its decision.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council wrongly granted planning permission for his neighbour’s extension. He says the Council did not visit his property, failed to request a heritage statement and did not properly consider the impact of the development on his amenity.
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
There was no requirement for the Council to visit Mr X’s property as part of its consideration of the neighbour’s planning application. Its failure to do so does not therefore amount to fault.
The planning officer’s report shows the Council considered Mr X’s objections but decided the proposal was acceptable. I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the decision but the Council has considered the points he raised and the law does not allow us to question its judgement.
Mr X believes the application, and therefore the grant of planning permission itself, is invalid. This is because the applicant did not submit a heritage statement and the Council processed the application without requesting one. But we cannot determine the validity of the planning permission; this is a matter for the courts.
We can consider whether the Council’s decision to grant planning permission was affected by fault but there is no evidence to show it was. Mr X’s point about the heritage statement is a technicality; it does not alter the fact the Council considered the impact of the proposal on the local area, which is the reason Mr X believes a heritage statement was required.
It is therefore likely that if the Council had declined to consider the application without the heritage statement the applicant would simply have commissioned a statement and reapplied, and the Council would have reached the same decision to grant planning permission. We could not therefore say any fault regarding the requirement for a heritage statement affected the outcome of the application or caused you significant injustice.
We must also bear in mind that had the Council refused Mr X’s neighbour’s application they would have been able to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and we cannot guess at the outcome of any appeal.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault affecting the Council’s decision.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman