> | Accessiblity Options | Text Only | Text Size: A+ A- Reset | Links | Site Map
LGO Advice Team: 0300 061 0614
Quality and efficiency
Click here for speech assisted browser support
Files with this symbol are in .pdf format. To view these files you will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader software. It can be downloaded below free of charge. Click To Download
Planning applications Maladministration causing injustice
23 April 2008
Caradon councillors wrongly granted permission for a house outside the area approved for development in the Local Plan. The Ombudsman finds that there was no evidence that it was “essential for the needs of the applicant’s business” for the dwelling to be located at the site, and says “… if those members who voted in favour on the grounds of convenience to the applicant had considered the functional test properly it would, in my view, have been refused.” ‘Mr and Mrs Barnes’ (not their real names for legal reasons) complained about the way the Council granted planning permission for a house on land outside the area approved for development in the Local Plan and next to a field they used as a caravan site. The applicant was a mobile mechanic. Although the land was located centrally to his business operations, he already owned a house in a nearby village. The application was refused because it was contrary to Local Plan policy and Government guidance, which stated that dwellings could only be allowed in such locations if it was essential for an agricultural worker to live there. The man made a second application. By this time Government guidance had been relaxed so as to allow dwellings for those engaged in agriculture-related businesses. But it retained the functional test that the applicant had to demonstrate that it was essential for him to live there. This application was approved by 16 votes to 15. The Ombudsman found that councillors misdirected themselves when considering the second application. There was no particular need for the applicant to live on that site, and he was already housed within the area his business served. If members had given proper consideration to the functional test they would have refused the application. And some members took other irrelevant factors into account when reaching their decision. If the application had been considered properly the Ombudsman considers that it would have been refused. The Ombudsman finds maladministration causing injustice and recommends that the Council should ask the District Valuer to carry out a valuation of the Barnes’ property as it is and as it would be with the new dwelling and business activity in place, taking into account the potential impact on their caravan site business, and then pay them the difference between the two valuations, plus £250 for their time and trouble in bringing this complaint.
Date Published: 14/10/08
are in .pdf format. To view these files you will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader software. It can be downloaded below free of charge. Click To Download