Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s development proposals for her area which it said had been removed from the Strategic Growth Plan. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains that the Council has proposed allowing significant development in her area in future even though it removed plans for a major ‘Southern Gateway’ development from the development plan following consultation with residents.

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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mrs X submitted with her complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs X says the Council has changed its policy on future development in her area since it consulted residents about a county Strategic Growth Plan in 2018. She says that initial proposals for a large development area. The ‘Southern Gateway’ were dropped after consultation with residents. However, when the final plan was produced, she says and there is still significant scope for major development of infrastructure and transport hubs in future years. This could affect her home in future.
5. The Council told her that the ‘Southern gateway’ proposals are not included within the final plan. This does not mean that future development is precluded in some areas. The Council is currently bidding for government support for infra structure rather than any direct development proposals. Any particular developments in future would be subject to the planning process in which residents would be involved.
6. There are currently no planning applications which have a direct effect on Mrs X’s home and so there is no significant injustice which the Ombudsman could investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman