Summary: Ms X complains the Council refused to provide information on suitable door colours for a conservation area without payment of a fee. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint as it is late. Also, we have not seen evidence of fault in the Council’s decision not provide free planning advice. And as Ms X got the information she needed, I do not consider she has suffered any significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council refused to provide advice on permitted front door colours in a conservation area without payment of a fee.
2. She wants improvements to the Council’s website, and an informal process to enable people to ask for information without incurring a fee.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information provided by the Council, Ms X and on the Council’s website. Ms X commented on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. In April 2018 Ms X asked the Council for advice on permitted door colours as she lives in a conservation area. The Council advised her to apply for a lawful development certificate.
8. Ms X complained to the Council that a query over permitted colours for her front door should need a formal application and associated fee.
9. The Council did not respond.
10. In April 2019 the Council told Ms X that it no longer provides free permitted development checks. It explained it decided not to provide a free informal service because of the officer time needed. And because it is does not provide a binding decision. It advised there had been occasions where wrong advice or misunderstandings had been provided.

Assessment

11. Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision not to provide informal advice for what she regards as simple planning queries. However, the Council has decided that it will not provide an informal service and it has explained its reasons. This is a decision it is entitled to make.
12. I understand that Ms X found the information she was looking for shortly after her enquiry to the Council. However, she pursued her complaint because vulnerable people may think they have to pay to get an answer to a simple question.
13. The law is that we may not investigate any complaint where the complainant was aware of the matter more than 12 months previously. But we may exercise the Ombudsman’s discretion to investigate if there are good reasons to do so. In this case Ms X was aware of the fee charged by the Council for more than a year before complaining to the Ombudsman. While we expect people to have exhausted the Council’s complaint’s process, we usually expect this to take no longer than 12 weeks. Ms X did chase the Council for a response 4 times between May 2018 and April 2019, however she could have asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint in August 2018. So, this complaint is late.
14. I have discretion to set aside the late restriction if there is good reason to do so. A good reason is that Ms X was going through a complaints procedure that through no fault of her own, was delayed.
15. In this case, there are stronger reasons not to investigate. Our role is to investigate fault by the Council that has caused personal injustice to the complaint, for which we can provide a worthwhile remedy.
16. The Council has decided not to provide free planning advice. This is a decision it is entitled to make providing there is no fault in the process it followed when making the decision. I have seen no evidence of such fault.
17. Also, Ms X says the Council’s actions may lead vulnerable people to think they have to pay for an answer to a minor planning query. But, while she had to spend time seeking the answer to her query elsewhere I do not consider she has suffered a significant personal injustice which requires an investigation by the Ombudsman.
18. The Council did not respond to Ms X’s complaint within the timeframes set out in its complaints policy. It has apologised for this. While we expect the Council to respond according to its complaints policy, I do not propose to investigate this issue further. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I will not investigate this complaint because:
• The complaint is late
• It is unlikely we will find fault in the Council’s decision not to provide informal permitted development advice; and
• I do not consider that Ms X has suffered personal injustice which warrants an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman