Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for alterations to a building near Ms X’s home. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has granted planning permission for alterations to a building within a conservation area. She says the alterations will have a significant negative impact on the conservation area and the amenity of neighbouring properties.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
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 the complainant and information about the planning application on the Council’s website
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X’s home is on the same street as the building subject to the planning permission but it is not adjacent to it. Therefore the building would not have any impact on her in terms of privacy, overbearing or overshadowing. For this reason we have only considered how the Council considered the impact of the development on the conservation area and how it notified local people about the application.
7. There is no fault with how the Council notified people about the planning application for alterations to the building. The Council put up a notice in the local area publicising the application. That is all the Council is required to do by it’s policies and the law. The Council also notified the local Parish Council but received no comments in response.
8. The Council produced an officer report which sets out its consideration of the planning application. The report sets out the Council’s views on the impact of the alterations on the conservation area. The Council considered its own policies and national policies in reaching its view to grant planning permission. Ms X says the Council failed to consult its own heritage officer. However, the Council consulted the heritage officer regarding a similar application for the same property in the past and received no objection to the proposals.
9. Taking account of the officer report and past comments by the Council’s heritage officer there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it dealt with the planning application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman