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

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council failed to enforce a planning condition relating to obscure glazing in the windows of her neighbour’s development. She says it failed to enforce the condition when the process was prolonged and that it failed to consider the solution from her point of view. She says while the window installed is obscure glaze, it does not look like it from her view point and that the Council should have taken her concerns of privacy and protection from intrusion into account.

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 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 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. A planning condition attached to Ms X’s neighbour’s development required the windows to be obscure glaze to protect her privacy. One window was clear glaze in breach of the condition so the neighbour made a subsequent application to amend the condition and keep the clear glaze. The Council refused permission and the neighbour’s appeal to the Planning Inspectorate was unsuccessful.
7. The neighbour then installed obscure glaze to the window of a type different to the other obscure glaze windows. However, an officer visited and confirmed that, despite Ms X’s concerns that the window did not appear obscure glaze from her viewpoint, the glaze was obscure and that it satisfied the original condition.
8. Ms X says the Council failed to enforce the window condition while the neighbour made their planning application to the Council and appealed to the Planning Inspectorate. However, while Ms X has been frustrated by the time this process has taken to complete, there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council in its handling of this matter.
9. The original condition required obscure glaze and when the neighbour left one as clear glaze the proper process was followed by the Council in determining the subsequent application and waiting for the Inspector’s decision. While Ms X may not like the type of obscure glaze used in the window, an officer has visited and confirmed it is obscure glaze and that there is no sight into Ms X’s property. The condition has been met and there is no requirement that the obscure glaze used should satisfy Ms X.

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