East Suffolk Council (21 000 974)

Category : Planning > Other

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 30 Sep 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mrs B complained the Council failed to carry out a sequential flood risk assessment on a development site before it included in the local plan. We have discontinued our investigation because Mrs B's complaint is late.

The complaint

  1. Mrs B complained the Council failed to carry out a sequential flood risk assessment on a development site before it included it in the local plan. She says she is concerned about flooding in the local area.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)
  2. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the Council and Mrs B.
  2. Mrs B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Local plans

  1. Local planning authorities must produce a local plan which sets out future development for the local area.
  2. Local plans are subject to statutory procedures for public consultation and inspection by the Planning Inspectorate before they can be adopted by the local planning authority.

What happened

  1. Mrs B lives near to a proposed development site. The Council received an outline planning application for the development, and it subsequently granted planning permission. Outline applications are used to establish the principal of a proposal, leaving more detailed matters to be considered at a later stage.
  2. The Council started the consultation process for the final draft of a new local plan. The Council proposed including the development site in the local plan.
  3. Mrs B engaged in the local plan consultation process and expressed concern the development site would worsen flooding in the local area.
  4. Mrs B’s neighbour (on Mrs B’s and other residents’ behalf) contacted the Council around the same time and asked it to carry out an independent flood assessment on the development site. Mrs B says when the Council responded to her neighbour it dismissed their concerns and said the matter would be considered at a later stage.
  5. The Council approved the local plan in March 2019, after an examination by the Planning Inspector. It included the development site in the plan.
  6. Mrs B complained to the Council in January 2021 and said it had failed to carry out a sequential flood risk assessment before it included the development site in the local plan. She said the Council had failed to follow government guidance.
  7. The Council responded to Mrs B’s complaint and said the development site falls within the lowest level of flood risk. It said it would scrutinise the matter further when it received a detailed surface water drainage report.
  8. Mrs B escalated her complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure. She said the Council had failed to address her complaint. The Council responded to Mrs B in March 2021 and said it had nothing further to add.
  9. Mrs B remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and referred her complaint to the Ombudsman in April 2021.

Back to top

Analysis

  1. Mrs B’s complaint is late. She was aware the local plan was approved in March 2019, but she did not refer complaint to the Ombudsman until April 2021.
  2. Mrs B engaged in the local plan consultation process in 2018 and expressed her concerns about flooding. Mrs B’s neighbour (on Mrs B’s and other residents’ behalf) also contacted the Council around the same time and raised the issue of a flood assessment. Mrs B says the Council dismissed their concerns, but she could have brought her complaint to the Ombudsman much sooner if she was unhappy with the Council’s response. I have seen no good reasons for the delay and so I will not exercise discretion to investigate Mrs B’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I have discontinued my investigation into Mrs B’s complaint because it is late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings