Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the handling of his planning application. This is because the injustice he claims stems from the decision to refuse his application and we cannot decide if this was correct. If Mr X had felt the decision was wrong it would have been reasonable for him to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of his planning application. He says a local councillor wrongly influenced the Council’s decision and claims the decision itself is unlawful. He says the decision has devalued his property and caused him financial loss.

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’.
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
5. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• Delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• A decision to refuse planning permission
• Conditions placed on planning permission
• A planning enforcement notice.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The law allows us to consider complaints about local councils and some other bodies. We cannot consider complaints about local councillors. We cannot therefore determine whether the councillor breached the code of conduct in objecting to Mr X’s planning application or in any actions they took to make their point.
8. Mr X should however be aware that councillors are generally entitled to make comments on planning applications either as members of the public or in their capacity as local councillors. It is for the planning officer to determine whether their comments are material to the process.
9. While Mr X’s complaint focuses on the councillor’s involvement it was the Council’s decision to refuse his planning application which caused the injustice he claims. Mr X had a right of appeal against the decision and if he believed it was wrong, it would have been reasonable for him to use it.
10. Mr X says he did not have the opportunity to appeal because he had contacted the planning officer and not received a response, but he had 12 weeks to lodge and appeal and did not need to wait for the Council’s response to do so. The Council’s decision notice set out Mr X’s right of appeal to the Planning Inspector and Mr X should have been aware of the time limits for an appeal. Mr X may also ask the Planning Inspector to consider a late appeal if he believes there are grounds for this.
11. We cannot decide whether the Council’s decision to refuse Mr X’s application was correct and we cannot therefore recommend a remedy for Mr X in this case.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman