Cambridge City Council (06B07907)

Planning applications                 Maladministration causing injustice

21 June 2008

The complaint

Ms Y complained about the way the Council dealt with two similar planning applications for extensions to neighbouring semidetached properties. She complained that the Council failed to take adequate account of the adverse impact on her Victorian property and failed to adopt an even-handed approach.

Ms Y said that the nearer extension severely affected her amenity as it doubled the length of the house and was very close to the boundary. She looked out onto a brick wall and felt very enclosed. She also said that her first floor bedroom window was overlooked by the new ground floor dining room window and she needed to erect a fence to screen the extension.

The Ombudsman’s view

The Ombudsman found fault in that the Council:

• did not take adequate steps to consider the unique joint nature of the applications and the effect this had on the committee process;
• did not allow Ms Y to speak to the committee before the decision on the first application had been made; and
• did not give clear reasons why the committee departed from the planning officer’s recommendation to refuse both applications.

The Ombudsman said that these failures caused Ms Y injustice as she was left with a perception of unfairness in the decision-making process and the feeling that, once the decision had been made on the first application, the decision on the second one was a foregone conclusion. This was exacerbated by the failure to provide proper reasons for the decisions.

The outcome

The Ombudsman could not say that permission for the extensions would not have been granted even without the failures he had identified. He recommended that the Council pay Ms Y £1,000.

Date Updated: 13/01/09