Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions and representations of an individual councillor when determining a planning application on behalf of the Council. This is because the complainant does not dispute the outcome of the planning application and there is therefore insufficient evidence the alleged fault caused a significant enough injustice to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mr L) complains about the actions of an individual councillor during a planning committee meeting. In particular, he says the councillor presented photographic evidence about the site subject to the planning application which was not representative of the area. He also says the councillor inappropriately canvassed the local community against the planning application.
2. In summary, Mr L says the alleged fault has delayed the business making the planning application from operating. He wants the Council to hold the councillor accountable for allegedly acting in breach of the councillor code of conduct by not exercising independent judgement and objectivity.

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 any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (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 the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Before accepting a complaint, we must be satisfied that any alleged fault has caused a significant injustice. This means assessing whether the actions of the individual councillor, acting on behalf of the Council, has caused serious loss, harm or distress. This complaint concerns the conduct of the councillor in the course of exercising their duties in determining a planning application, though I note Mr L does not dispute the outcome of the planning committee to refuse this. On this basis, the alleged injustice is limited to Mr L disagreeing with the representations of the individual councillor, as opposed to the impact these had on the planning application. I do not consider disagreement between Mr L and the councillor caused a sufficient enough injustice to warrant our involvement given the outcome of the planning application is not disputed.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence the alleged fault caused a significant enough injustice to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman