Archive has 180 results
-
Statement Not upheld Other 11-Mar-2022
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to determine an application to vary his section 106 planning agreement and that this has caused him significant losses. We ended our investigation because it is unlikely to result in a meaningful outcome.
-
West Devon Borough Council (21 015 150)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 11-Mar-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to revoke planning permission for a site opposite the complainant’s home. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.
-
East Riding of Yorkshire Council (21 008 262)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 09-Mar-2022
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a housing development on land next to his home. We did not investigate this complaint further because it was brought to us outside our 12‑month time limit and further investigation is unlikely to result in a meaningful outcome.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 09-Mar-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council imposing a Community Infrastructure Levy surcharge on the complainant, and that a council officer advised the complainant to act unethically. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in relation to the surcharge, and the complainant has not suffered an injustice as a result of the alleged comments by the officer.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 09-Mar-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against the owner of a listed building. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.
-
London Borough of Barnet (21 016 397)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 04-Mar-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to make its local plan policies easily accessible in the local libraries. Any fault has not caused the complainant a significant personal injustice. And it is for the Planning Inspector to decide whether the Council’s consultation and plan are sound, and the process was legally compliant.
-
Havant Borough Council (21 000 596)
Statement Not upheld Other 01-Mar-2022
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to approve development behind her home. We ended our investigation because it was unlikely to result in a finding of fault or a remedy for Mrs X.
-
Dacorum Borough Council (21 006 954)
Statement Upheld Other 28-Feb-2022
Summary: Mr B complained the Council wrongly confirmed an Article 4 Direction for an area in which he owns a plot of land. We found no fault in how the Council handled the Article 4 Direction process, we cannot therefore criticise the merits of its decision. Also, there was not fault in how it responded to Mr B’s complaint in 2021. However, it was at fault for failing to respond to him when he first brought his concerns to its attention in 2020. It has agreed to apologise to Mr B for the uncertainty this caused.
-
Lake District National Park Authority (21 013 039)
Statement Upheld Other 22-Feb-2022
Summary: There was fault in how the Authority handled planning matters at a site close to Mr B’s home. It did not follow its publicity policy, it did not expressly consider the impact on his privacy, and it has taken too long to deal with breaches of planning control. The Authority should apologise to him, make a payment, and formulate an action plan as to how it will resolve the outstanding enforcement matters so that there is no avoidable delay and make sure this is communicated to residents.
-
London Borough of Bromley (21 014 998)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 07-Feb-2022
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning matter. There is no evidence of fault by the Council and its actions did not cause of the injustice Mr X claims.