The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of significant injustice to justify an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X, the complainant, complains that a senior Council officer influenced planning committee members on a planning application decision for a proposed, large-scale development next to his home.
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 the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complains a senior planning officer placed undue pressure on members of the planning committee. He says the officer tried to influence members to approve planning permission for a 19 dwelling development Mr X objected to.
During a planning committee meeting, members voted to reject the planning application, going against recommendations of planning officers.
We will not investigate this complaint. There is not enough evidence of significant injustice to warrant our involvement. The decision the planning committee made ultimately gave Mr X the outcome he wanted which was not to grant planning consent to a development to which he objected. The actions of the planning officer did not therefore lead to an unfavourable outcome.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman