Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about traffic noise and environmental concerns in Exmoor National Park. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the National Park Authority’s planning authority has failed to prevent noise from traffic around Dulverton and address his environmental concerns about Exmoor National Park. He says it has caused him a lack of sleep and health issues.
2. Mr X wants there to be a study about his environmental concerns about Exmoor National Park. He wants the study to focus on land use changes, noise impact on local wildlife and pollution effects on the ecosystem.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating,
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the complainant is using their enquiry as a way of raising a wider community campaign about something of general concern but where they have not suffered injustice.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the National Park Authority.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Planning authorities should approve planning applications that accord with policies in the local development plan, unless other material planning considerations indicate they should not.
9. The National Park Authority told Mr X it considers the noise implications of planning applications that come before it. However, it says the complaint about increasing noise levels caused by general traffic is not a planning matter. I have seen no evidence of fault in the Authority’s response to Mr X.
10. The study that Mr X wants is not an outcome that we can achieve.
11. Mr X has also directed this complaint to Somerset Council, Dulverton Town Council, Natural England and the Planning Inspectorate. I consider this is evidence Mr X is raising a wider campaign of general concern. We will not normally investigate this type of complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Authority’s response.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman