Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Rother District Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 23-021-173 Sector Planning Category Planning Applications Decided 09 June 2024

View Rother District Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application. We do not consider the complainant has suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants an investigation.

The complaint

Mr X complains the Council failed to provide details of a planning appeals case to the public prior to introducing it as part of a planning committee debate on a planning application before granting planning permission.

He says he was denied the right to inspect all documents referred to by planning officers.

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 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 continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Mr X complained to the Council that it failed to ensure details of an appeal referenced in the planning officers report and referred to at a planning committee meeting were available for public view before the planning committee meeting.

This refers to a planning officer telling the planning committee about the Council having to pay costs for a lost appeal which it considered was similar to a retrospective planning the committee was considering.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the reference to appeals and costs is common, and I do not consider the planning decision would have been any different if the exact planning appeal reference had been made available before the meeting. Nor do I consider Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice which justifies an investigation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Rother District Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
24-022-810 Upheld
25-011-763 Upheld
25-012-211 Other
25-000-401 06 Jan 2026 Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not properly considered taking enforcement action against breaches of planning permission. The Council … Not Upheld
24-002-620 04 Dec 2025 Summary: Mr X complained about a Council parking notice. We found fault with the notice issued. The Council agreed to … Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation