Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled his planning application and business rates account. Parts of the complaint are late and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the remaining matters.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council encouraged him to withdraw a planning application for illuminated advertising, but later allowed another operator to install illuminated screens at the same site. He also complains about backdated business rates, the Council’s consideration of relief from those rates, licence fees and complaint handling. 

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X withdrew his planning application in January 2023. We look at each complaint individually and on its merits, considering the circumstances of each case. But we do not exercise discretion to accept a late complaint unless there are good reasons to do so. Although Mr X considers the Council’s later approval of another application in 2025 unfair, he could have complained sooner about the 2023 matters which led him to withdraw his application. I have considered whether to exercise our discretion to investigate this late part of this complaint, but I have seen no good reasons to do so.
8. Even if this part of the complaint were not late, we would not investigate. By withdrawing the application Mr X gave up the opportunity to receive a decision and, if refused, to appeal. We cannot decide whether the application should have been approved, so further investigation would not achieve a worthwhile outcome.
9. Mr X also complained about backdated business rate bills. The Valuation Office Agency added the advertising site to the rating list in 2025, with effect from 2023. The Council issued the backdated bills the following day. Councils should issue business rate bills as soon as practicable. There is no evidence it could have billed Mr X sooner. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. 
10. Mr X complained the Council should have reduced his business rates because the site was only partly occupied. The Council explained this relief did not apply because an advertising right is treated as occupied while a person holds that right. Mr X held the advertising right during the relevant period. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s consideration of relief for partial occupation.
11. Mr X also complained the Council should have granted hardship relief. The Council said Mr X had not applied for hardship relief and provided him with information about how he could apply. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. 
12. Mr X also complained he paid licence fees for a site that was not commercially viable. This complaint arises from Mr X not having planning permission for his intended use of the site. It is therefore not separable from the complaint about withdrawing the planning application in 2023. We will not investigate this complaint because it is late and further investigation would not achieve a worthwhile outcome. 
13. Mr X also complained about poor communication and complaint handling. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint because it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint handling when we are not looking at the substantive issues.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. Parts of the complaint are late and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the remaining matters.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman