Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not suffered any significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his neighbour’s planning application. Mr X says the decision to grant planning permission was based on inaccurate information and the development will have a significant impact on his 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 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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

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

My assessment

4. When a local authority receives a planning application it must look at the development plan and material planning considerations to decide if the proposal is acceptable. Material considerations relate to the use and development of the land in the public interest and includes matters such as the impact on neighbouring properties and the relevant planning policies. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material considerations in determining a planning application.
5. The Council has accepted there are errors in the case officer’s report as the officer referred to the incorrect measurements for the outbuilding. However, I do not consider Mr X has suffered any significant injustice because of this error. The Council has explained an outbuilding with the correct measurements would still be acceptable and not have an overbearing impact on Mr X’s property. Therefore, I consider it likely the planning decision would be the same had the correct measurements been included in the officer’s report. I understand Mr X disagrees. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide the development was acceptable.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered any significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman