Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s application to carry out works to a protected tree. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, has complained about how the Council dealt with her application to carry out works to a protected tree. Miss X says the Council took too long to determine her application and did not respond to her correspondence. Miss X also disagrees with the Council’s decision to refuse permission for the works.

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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b))
4. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• a decision to refuse planning permission
• conditions placed on planning permission
• a planning enforcement notice.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X could have appealed to the Planning Inspector if she was unhappy with the Council’s decision to refuse her application. She also could have appealed to the Inspector after eight weeks if she was unhappy with how long the Council was taking to determine the application.
7. I understand Miss X says she could not appeal to the Planning Inspector as the Council did not respond to her questions about the appeal process. She also says it sent the decision notice to the wrong address. However, I consider it would have been reasonable for Miss X to have used her appeal right. Although the Council did not send the decision notice to Miss X’s home address as it should have, Miss X did view the notice on the Council’s website before the appeal deadline. The notice included details of the appeal process. Therefore, I consider Miss X could have reasonably been aware of how to appeal against the Council’s decision. The Ombudsman will not usually investigate when someone had a right to appeal to the Planning Inspector, even if the appeal would not address all the issues complained about.
8. Miss X has also complained about the Council’s complaint handling. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the main issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor issues such as complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it would have been reasonable for her to have used her right of appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman