The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a planning application. He says the Council failed to notify him about the application and he lost the opportunity to object. Mr X says the development does not comply with planning policy and will have a significant impact on his home.
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, or 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
Councils are required to give publicity to planning applications. The publicity required depends on the nature of the development. However, in all cases the application must be published on the Council’s website.
In this case, the Council says it sent letters to the residents of neighbouring properties, including Mr X. Mr X disputes this and says the Council has not provided sufficient proof to show it sent the letters. However, even if I could say the Council failed to publicise the application as it should have, I do not consider Mr X has suffered significant injustice as a result.
I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the acceptability of the development before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report referred to the impact on neighbouring properties. However, the officer decided the proposal would not have a significant impact in terms of overlooking, loss of light or any other loss of amenity. The Council also further addressed the impact on Mr X’s home in its response to his complaint.
Mr X says his home has been damaged by the development and his property will lose value. But these are not material planning matters and concerns about property damage will be a private civil matter between Mr X and his neighbour.
I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant planning permission, but the Council was entitled to use its professional judgment to decide the application was acceptable. As the Council properly considered the application, it is likely the decision to grant planning permission would be the same had Mr X known about the development and objected.
Mr X has also raised concerns about his neighbour not complying with planning conditions. However, if Mr X is concerned about a possible breach of planning control, he can report this to the Council’s enforcement team to investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not been caused significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman