Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the way the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of a planning application for development on land adjacent to his own.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s response. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and invited his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council granted planning permission for new dwellings on land adjacent to Mr X’s property in 2019. Mr X complains the Council should have notified him of the application directly as he does not walk past the lamppost on which it placed the site notice. However he objected to the proposal during the consultation period, raising concerns about overbearing, loss of light and impact on privacy. He also felt the design of the new dwellings was not in keeping with the character of the area.
6. Mr X believes the Council did not properly consider his objections and complains about the impact the development will have on his property. He would like the Council to reverse its decision or otherwise amend the scale of the new dwellings to make them smaller.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The law requires the council to consult on applications for planning permission in cases such as this but consultation may be either by site notice or neighbour notification letter. The Council decided to put up a site notice and it did not therefore have to write to Mr X and other adjoining neighbours directly. In addition, although Mr X says he was unaware of the application until it was too late he was able to comment on the proposal and his comments were taken into consideration by the planning officer dealing with the case.
8. The planning officer’s report shows the Council considered the issued Mr X, and others, and decided the proposal was acceptable. I have seen no evidence of fault in the way this decision was reached and we cannot therefore criticise it.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman