Selby District Council (19 013 392)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 27-Jan-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council seeking an affordable housing contribution in relation to the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant did not contact the Ombudsman within 12 months of becoming aware of the alleged fault, and there are insufficient grounds to exercise discretion to consider the matter now.

Shropshire Council (18 019 770)

Report Upheld Other 24-Jan-2020

Summary: Mr G complains the Council failed to consult with Sport England, before approving a planning application for development next to the home ground of a cricket club he represents. This meant the development was constructed without measures to mitigate the risk of damage from cricket balls.

Northampton Borough Council (19 008 078)

Statement Not upheld Other 24-Jan-2020

Summary: The complainant says the Council failed to consider the impact on him and his neighbours when considering an application for a certificate of lawfulness of use when it granted the certificate. The change of use the complainant says has led to anti-social behaviour, loss of amenity and a devaluation of his home. The Council says it considered the application correctly and the Police have taken the lead in dealing with the anti-social behaviour such as criminal damage and threats of violence. The Ombudsman finds the Council acted without fault.

Forest of Dean District Council (19 008 146)

Statement Upheld Other 23-Jan-2020

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to consider relevant planning matters when granting outline planning permission for a development. He says this will lead to unacceptable overlooking of his garden and damage to the local ecology. The Council considered those matters relevant at this early stage, with the rest left for later, so there was no fault. However, the Council failed to refer Mr X to the Ombudsman when it responded to his complaint. It will make sure it does this in future.

Durham County Council (19 014 297)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 23-Jan-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr Q’s complaint about the Council’s Local Plan. This is because the Planning Inspector is better placed to consider the matters complained of.

Leicestershire County Council (19 011 167)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 22-Jan-2020

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s development proposals for her area which it said had been removed from the Strategic Growth Plan. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Milton Keynes Council (19 012 449)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 21-Jan-2020

Summary: Mr X complains the Council restricted its consultation on proposal for redevelopment of a housing estate to residents of the estate only. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint as we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions and we do not consider he has suffered a significant personal injustice. Nor can we achieve the outcome he is seeking.

East Northamptonshire Council (19 012 985)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 20-Jan-2020

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to tell him it had referred his unpaid debt to the Sherriff’s Office and the additional costs this incurred. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. Further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different result.

Bristol City Council (19 011 855)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-Jan-2020

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council has not responded promptly to a Freedom of Information request about a planning matter. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because this is a matter for the Information Commissioner.

Northumberland County Council (19 008 568)

Statement Not upheld Other 10-Jan-2020

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application to extend and change the use of a disused building. We did not investigate this complaint further as Mr X was not caused a significant injustice and there was no evidence of fault in the process by which the decision was made.