Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the planning enforcement and planning application processes relating to an extension built near the complainant’s home. The alleged faults have not caused the complainant a significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of the planning enforcement and planning application processes relating to an extension to a property on her road.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• 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

3. I considered:
• the complaint and information submitted by Mrs X.
• information about the planning applications on the Council’s website.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. I appreciate Mrs X may not like the extension, and has raised several concerns about the way the Council handled the associated planning enforcement process and subsequent planning applications. But I am not persuaded the extension itself causes Mrs X a significant personal injustice, so the Ombudsman will not start an investigation into the faults she alleges. In reaching this view, I am mindful that the extension is approximately 30m away from Mrs X, on the other side of the road, and is partially screened by a boundary hedge.
5. I note Mrs X also says the delay in publishing the correct decision notice on the Council’s website could have prevented the submission of an application to judicially review the planning decisions. But, considering the following bullet points, I am not persuaded the delay denied Mrs X the opportunity to pursue a legal challenge so, again, I do not see she has been caused a significant personal injustice:
• The officer’s report was published when the decision was made, and this contains the reasons for granting permission and the proposed conditions.
• I have seen nothing to suggest Mrs X was actively seeking to prepare a judicial review claim after the decision was made.
• It is possible to request an extension of time for the submission of a judicial review claim in exceptional circumstances.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the alleged fault has not caused her a significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman