The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to accept and grant permission for a non-material amendment planning application. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation. And we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking.
The complaint
Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to accept, process and grant permission for a non-material planning (NMA) application.
He wants the NMA planning permission reversed and the original permission imposed.
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 we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(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
The Council received an NMA application to make changes to an existing planning permission for a development next to Mr X’s home. One change was to remove the roof from the bin store on the site.
Mr X is concerned that the Council did not follow the correct process when it evaluated whether removing the bin store roof was a non-material change.
The Council noted there was no change proposed to the size or location of the bin store. The only change was the removal of the roof. The wall around the bin store and the vegetation and trees along the boundary remain. The Council decided the removal of the bin store roof was a non-material change.
Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 allows a local planning authority to make a change to a planning permission relating to land in their area if they are satisfied that the change is not material. There is no definition of ‘non-material’ and whether a change is non-material is a decision for the local planning authority to make.
I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council; however, I have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered and decided the NMA planning application to justify an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered and decided the NMA planning application. Also, we cannot require the Council to revoke the planning permission so we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman