Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning matter. There is no evidence of fault by the Council and its actions did not cause of the injustice Mr X claims.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council failed to consult him on his neighbour’s development. He also complains the development overlooks his children’s bedrooms and private garden. The Council says the development does not require planning permission but Mr X believes it has a harmful impact on his property and should not be allowed.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Background

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.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X’s neighbour applied for a CLD to confirm their proposed development was permitted under the 2015 Order. The Council assessed the application and decided it was permitted, so it issued the CLD.
7. It appears Mr X’s neighbour did not complete the development in accordance with their plans and this was raised with the Council as a possible breach of planning control. But the Council looked at what had been built and confirmed it was still permitted development, even if it varied slightly from the plans; it could not therefore take formal enforcement action or require the neighbour to alter it and its refusal to take the matter further was not fault.
8. While it is clear Mr X is unhappy with the development his comments focus on the impact of the development rather than any fault in the process. This is not something the Council can consider where development is permitted under the 2015 Order.
9. We must also take into account that it is not the Council’s decision or the CLD which provides authority for the development; it has simply confirmed the proposal is permitted development under the 2015 Order. It is the Order itself which allows Mr X’s neighbour to develop his property in the way they have.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X’s claimed injustice stems from the creation of ‘permitted development’ rights by central government rather than any fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman