Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of their neighbour’s application for a lawful development certificate. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council affecting its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainants, Mr and Mrs X, complains about the Council’s decision to grant an application for a lawful development certificate (LDC) for their neighbour’s loft conversion and dormer window. Mr and Mrs X want the Council to rescind the LDC and stop the development as they are concerned about its impact on their privacy and the value of their property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (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 considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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.
6. Although permitted development does not require planning permission a person may apply to the local planning authority for an LDC. An application for an LDC 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.
7. This complaint concerns whether the development was permitted by the 2015 Order and this hinges on a single point of disagreement over which side of the neighbour’s property is the “principal elevation”. Mr and Mrs X argue that historically the front of the property was considered the elevation facing the public highway but the Council has decided the principal elevation is that which features the front door, which Mr and Mrs X consider is the side.
8. It is for the Council as the local planning authority to decide which is the principal elevation and the law does not allow us to question its judgement. While Mr and Mrs X clearly disagree with the Council’s view the Council has considered government guidance and explained how it reached its decision. It is consistent with what most members of the public would consider to be the principal elevation and is not patently incorrect.
9. I acknowledge Mr X’s point that previous applications have described a different elevation as the “front” but this does not mean it is the principal elevation and it does not bind the Council in all future decisions.
10. Once the Council decided which side of the house is the principal elevation it had to apply the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 and reached the view the development does not require planning permission. It could not therefore take into account Mr and Mrs X’s concerns about the impact of the development on their privacy and could not stop the development from proceeding. We have no power to overturn the Council’s decision and cannot therefore achieve the outcome Mr and Mrs X want.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault affecting the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman