Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission and how it responded to the complainant’s subsequent complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant intervention.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that the Council failed to properly consider her privacy when approving a planning application. She says the impact of the building work has had a significant, negative impact on her wellbeing and amenity causing distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, and relevant online planning documents, maps and images.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X’s complaint raises several concerns relating to the planning permission a neighbour was granted. The key issues relate to the impact on the amenity of her property and the change in use for one of the rooms overlooking the garden area. Specifically, she complains that the Council failed to impose a condition specifying that the room be obscure glazed. Mrs X also complains that her planning application has been unfairly treated in comparison and restrictions imposed on her were not placed upon the neighbour.
6. The Council officer’s report shows that the officer had consideration for the impact the work would have on both Mrs X’s residence and neighbouring properties. They carried out an assessment that considered the appropriate policies and guidance and specially considered any impact on Mrs X’s amenity, including the potential for overlooking.
7. The Council has no say over what the occupier uses specific rooms for. The evidence shows that it has considered the matter and taken the view that the use of the room has not had an unacceptable impact of Mrs X’s amenity.
8. In response to Mrs X’s complaint about her application being treated unfairly, the Council has told Mrs X that each case is looked at on its own merits.
9. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part. We consider the processes councils have followed to make their decisions We may only criticise a council’s decision where there is evidence of fault in its decision-making process and, but for that fault, officers may have made a different decision.
10. In this case, there is no evidence of fault in the way the decision was made. We cannot therefore criticise the decision or intervene with an alternative view. The fact that Mrs X’s application was treated differently is not evidence of fault and would not, in itself, justify our intervention.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman