Archive has 857 results
-
South Holland District Council (19 017 491)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 16-Mar-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council refused Ms J and Ms K planning permission for a self-build housing development. The complaint is outside the Ombudsman jurisdiction because they had a right of appeal to the planning inspector.
-
Guildford Borough Council (19 016 140)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 16-Mar-2020
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s consideration of a planning application for landscaping of a car park and a bund near him. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice to him to warrant investigation.
-
Breckland District Council (19 018 403)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 16-Mar-2020
Summary: Mr & Mrs X complain about the Council’s decision to allow overdevelopment of the site next to their home. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint as it is too late. And there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning applications.
-
Tandridge District Council (19 018 537)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 16-Mar-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to inform a planning agent of the likely outcome of his clients’ application, contrary to the assurances it had previously given that it would do so. The Council has already taken, or proposed to take, satisfactory action in response to the complaint.
-
London Borough of Haringey (19 006 405)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 13-Mar-2020
Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not enforced a condition in a planning application for a development near to his property. Mr X says this has caused him to lose privacy. From the evidence seen, the Ombudsman finds fault with how the planning condition was drafted. However, this did not cause any injustice to Mr X.
-
Somerset West and Taunton Council (19 009 645)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 13-Mar-2020
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to properly deal with the poor condition of a site adjacent to her home. There was some delay dealing with reports she made to the planning department in 2018. This was fault. However, action was being taken by environmental health officers in the period concerned. An environmental health officer and planning officer appropriately considered the further reports Mrs X made from 2019. The Council made an appropriate referral to the Environment Agency. The Council should apologise to Mrs X for the delays in 2018 to remedy the complaint.
-
Eastbourne Borough Council (19 012 971)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 13-Mar-2020
Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council considered a planning application for a neighbour’s extension and the impact upon his property. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.
-
North Kesteven District Council (19 017 804)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 13-Mar-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs Q’s complaint about the District Council’s handling of a planning application and planning enforcement. This is because part of the complaint is late. Nor are we likely to find fault with the District Council’s failure to take enforcement action. And another body is better placed to consider part of the complaint.
-
Kingston Upon Hull City Council (19 017 343)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 12-Mar-2020
Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council treated his request for pavement advertising and seating for his business. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because he could appeal to the magistrates about a refusal to issue a licence.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 12-Mar-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a new dwelling opposite his home. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.