Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions as a statutory consultee on a planning application and planning enforcement case. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s responses as a consultee on a planning application for a site near his home. He also complains the Council failed to act when it was consulted on a report of a breach of planning control for the same site.
2. He wants the Council to correct the offsite risks caused by the new development.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council is the Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA) for the area where Mr X lives. In 2018 the local planning authority (LPA) consulted the Council on a planning application for up to 280 new homes and associated infrastructure in the town where Mr X lives.
7. The LPA records which are available on its website show the Council requested further information about the developer and about surface water drainage several times. When it decided it had enough information it recommended the LPA approve the application. It also advised the applicant of several informatives on their obligations when carrying out work or discharging to a watercourse or main river and when laying new surface water drainage pipes.
8. I understand Mr X says the Council failed to consider the flood risk to other areas because of the new development. However, the Council as LLFA is the expert body. It commented on the application and made its recommendations.
9. We have not seen any evidence of fault in the way the Council acted as statutory consultee on a planning application.
10. Mr X also complains the Council refused to act when it was also consulted by the LPA on a reported breach of planning control at the site.
11. The Council confirmed officers visited the application site twice with officers from the LPA. The Officers were satisfied the there was no reason to believe there has been any breach of Planning Control, and that the development has been built in accordance with the approved plans.
12. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s opinion that there is no breach of planning control and he believes surface water run off from the site will drain into the local river which will cause flood elsewhere.
13. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
14. In this case Council officers have visited the site twice and are satisfied the development drainage has been built according to approved plans.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to the LPA as statutory Consultee. Nor have we seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council assisted the LPA following reports of breaches of planning control.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman