Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning applications for a site in Ms X’s locale. This is because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of four planning applications related to development at a site in her locale which she says has led to inappropriate development in the Green Belt which will exacerbate flooding. She says Council policy and procedures were not properly followed and the planning permissions granted should be revoked.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (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, including its response to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained to the Council about its handling of four planning applications concerning development at a site in her locale with which she disagrees.
7. The Council addressed her concerns about procedural and policy matters but did not uphold her complaint as it found no issues in how the applications had been assessed and considered.
8. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants disagree. We cannot question the Council’s decisions if it has followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. While Ms X may disagree with the decisions taken by the Council on the four applications, there is no evidence to suggest fault affected them.
9. There was delay by the Council in addressing Ms X’s complaint for which it apologised. We will not investigate complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman