Archive has 111 results
-
Cambridge City Council (19 004 621)
Statement Upheld Other 29-Jul-2020
Summary: The Council has accepted there was fault in the way it reached a decision to grant planning permission for a housing development next to Ms X’s home. The Council has offered to pay Ms X £500 to acknowledge this. There is no fault in the way the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission for a second planning application for the site based on amended plans.
-
St Albans City Council (19 005 065)
Statement Upheld Other 29-Jul-2020
Summary: Mrs X says the Council failed to properly consider her amenity when approving a planning application. She says the Council’s approval of the development will disturb the quiet enjoyment of her rented property. The Council’s consideration of environmental issues raised by Mrs X is at fault. I consider this has damaged her faith in the planning system which is an injustice. But, even if the Council had done things correctly, it would have granted permission. We have recommended the Council acknowledge the distress caused with an apology and a service improvement recommendation.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 27-Jul-2020
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council refuses to provide her housing association with information it needs to decide whether to allow her to carry out a mutual exchange. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint as we are unlikely to find fault in the Councils actions.
-
Oadby & Wigston Borough Council (19 013 892)
Statement Not upheld Other 24-Jul-2020
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision on a planning application and its poor complaint handling, causing him loss of light, loss of privacy and distress. The Ombudsman finds no fault by the Council.
-
Chorley Borough Council (20 001 000)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 21-Jul-2020
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for new houses close to his home. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because we do not consider that Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice because of the Council’s actions.
-
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (20 000 538)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 07-Jul-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs A’s complaint about the way the Council consulted local residents on its proposal for a controlled parking zone and its refusal of her application for a dropped kerb. This is because we have not seen evidence of fault by the Council.
-
Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council (20 000 789)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 03-Jul-2020
Summary: Mr X complains about a planning application to be considered by the Council. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the injustice is speculative as the planning application has not been determined yet.
-
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (19 013 300)
Statement Upheld Other 01-Jul-2020
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s alleged failure to take planning enforcement action against unlawful activities at a quarry. The Council has not investigated his concerns. This was fault. The Council agreed to respond to Mr X’s complaint and provide a financial remedy to him that reflects the unnecessary time and trouble he was put to in pursuit of this matter.
-
London Borough of Bexley (19 019 161)
Statement Not upheld Other 18-Jun-2020
Summary: Mr X complained that, following its approval of an extension to a retail development, the Council failed to enforce a minimum width of footpath of 1.5 metres. The developer has since removed the main obstructions. I have ended my investigation, because further investigation is unlikely to lead to a finding of fault or remedy for Mr X.
-
North Lincolnshire Council (19 021 143)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 01-May-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s 2017 decision to grant a Certificate of Lawful Development to a nearby industrial site. The complaint is late. There is not enough evidence of Council fault to justify an Ombudsman investigation of the matter now. Mr X can submit to the Council any evidence he has about the site’s certification which he considers should result in different decision, and it would be reasonable to ask the courts to decide any question of the Council’s interpretation of planning law relevant to the site.