The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a planning application as there is no evidence of fault by the Council and there is a civil remedy through the courts.
The complaint
Mr X complains that a neighbour’s extension has caused damage to his property and he was not consulted about the original planning application.
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: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal; or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) We have the power to start or end an investigation into a complaint about actions the law allows us to investigate. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been mentioned as part of the legal proceedings regarding a closely related matter. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X’s neighbour obtained planning permission for a one storey extension in 2021. Mr X says he was unaware of the planning application although the Council provided evidence to show that he was notified of this (and a previous similar withdrawn planning application). I am satisfied from the evidence that the Council properly notified Mr X of the planning application, even if he did not receive it or recalls the letter.
The Planning Officer’s report clearly indicates that Mr X’s amenity was considered and the conclusion (that most of the extension could have been built without planning permission and was therefore acceptable) was reached without administrative fault.
The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether you disagree with the decision the organisation made.
Mr X says that the extension downpipe has been built over his land and this has affected drainage. The Council says that any impingement on to Mr X’s land is a civil matter. I am satisfied that the dispute is a private matter which could be remedied in the courts.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault and a remedy through the courts.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman