Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his neighbour’s planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault causing Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council failed to notify him about his neighbour’s planning application and he was therefore unable to comment on the proposal. He says the development will impact on his privacy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 sets the requirements for consultation about planning applications. For minor development, which includes work to a single dwelling as is the case here, councils have discretion over whether to send notification letters directly to adjoining neighbours or to post site notices.
6. The Council has previously sent neighbour notification letters but it decided in 2021 to alter its procedure to use site notices instead. Mr X was unaware of this change but the Council confirms it was publicised via its website and by contacting people who had submitted objections within the past 12 months. We would not expect it to contact everyone in its area about the change.
7. Because Mr X was not aware the Council had stared to use site notices instead of neighbour letters he was unaware of his neighbour’s application for planning permission and could not object to it. But this was not the result of any fault by the Council. In posting site notices the Council acted in accordance with the 2015 Order referred to at Paragraph 5 and its own policy. Mr X is unhappy with the positioning of the site notices but there are no specific requirements on this point.
8. In any event, Mr X confirms his main concern is about a window in the side-elevation of his neighbour’s property and the Council has explained the reasons why his concerns about the window would not have warranted refusal. We could not therefore say that the outcome would have been different even if Mr X had known about the application and objected at the time. There is also some suggestion that Mr X’s neighbour has decided not to implement the planning permission and that he will apply for a revised scheme instead. If this is the case Mr X may put forward his concerns and the Council would have to consider them in deciding whether to approve the application.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or to show any fault caused Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman