Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to consult him about his neighbour’s plans to develop their property. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council did not consult him about his neighbour’s development, which causing overlooking to his bedroom window.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. 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

4. The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) allows certain development without the need for planning permission. This is known as ‘permitted development’. Permitted development rights are subject to limitations and exclusions, but when a proposal falls within the parameters of development allowed by the Order it will not require planning permission; the Council therefore has no basis to refuse it.
5. Although permitted development does not require planning permission a person may apply to the local planning authority for a certificate of lawful development (CLD) for their proposal. An application for a CLD determines whether the development proposed is permitted or whether it requires planning permission. If the proposal is permitted development, and if the applicant carries out the development in accordance with the approved plans, the Council cannot stop it. If an applicant submits plans which suggest the proposal is permitted development but then carries out work which is not allowed, the Council could investigate as a possible breach of planning control.
6. Mr X’s complaint concerns his neighbour’s building work, which the Council says amounts to permitted development. He complains he was not consulted on the proposal and that it causes overlooking to his bedroom window. He wants the development to be taken down.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The government briefing paper Mr X believes allows the Council to consult on permitted development refers to applications for “prior approval” under the government’s larger home extensions scheme. This requires the homeowner to seek the Council’s approval for their proposal and allows the Council to consult neighbours whose properties adjoin the application site.
8. Applications for certificates of lawful development which amount to permitted development which does not fall under the larger home extensions scheme cannot take into account the impact of development on neighbours and the process does not allow for or require neighbour consultation.
9. The Council has explained to Mr X that it did not grant permission for the development and that it would likely have refused an application had it had the option. Authority for the development comes from central government under the legislation referred to above and the Council cannot stop it. We cannot therefore achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman