Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a planning application for a site next to Mrs X’s home. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council processed the planning application. Also it is reasonable to expect her to complain to the Information Commissioner’s Officer if she believes the Council is withholding information.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council:
• Failed to consult with residents on a planning application for a site next to her home.
• Failed to follow correct process.
• Failed to provide information as promised; and
• Pushed an application through without due consideration and blaming "government agenda to have more housing".

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Planning authorities must publicise all planning applications. Depending on the nature of the development, publication may be by newspaper advertisement and/or site notice and/or neighbour notification. The notice will invite ‘representations’ for or against the application and explain how those representations may be made. The opportunity to make representations is not the same as being consulted.
7. Mrs X says the Council did not write to her and did not erect a site notice in her road when a developer applied to convert a garage into a bungalow on a site next to her property. The site lays between the road where Mrs X lives, which I shall call road A, and the neighbouring road which I shall call road B. Access to the site is from road A.
8. The Council confirms it printed off the site notices. It does not have any records of the locations where the site notices were posted. However, it is certain the senior officer would not have signed off the planning permission if the case officer had not followed the correct procedure.
9. In its’ response to Mrs X’s complaint the Council says Mrs X advised the applicant told her they had erected a site notice in road B. Therefore it appears that at least one site notice was erected near the application site. By placing a notice near the site, albeit in road B, the Council has satisfied the statutory requirement for publicising the application.
10. Mrs X also complains the Council failed to follow the correct procedure and “pushed the application through without due consideration”.
11. Planning controls the design, location and appearance of development and its impact on public amenity. Planning controls are not designed to protect private rights or interests. The Council may grant planning permission with conditions to control the use or development of land.
12. Local Planning Authorities must consider each application it receives on its own merits and decide it in line with their local planning policies, unless material considerations suggest otherwise. Material considerations concern the use and development of land in the public interest and include issues such as overlooking, traffic generation and noise. People’s comments on planning and land use issues linked to development proposals will be material considerations. Councils must take such comments into account but do not have to agree with those comments. In the absence of objections the Council must still consider the residential amenity of neighbouring properties.
13. The planning officer prepared a report on the proposal this includes the relevant nation and local planning policy and consideration of the impact of the development on neighbouring properties. The officer explained why they considered the scheme acceptable. A senior officer reviewed the application and approved it under the Council’s scheme of delegation.
14. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. I understand Mrs X disagrees with the Council, but it is for planning officers or committee members to balance both national and local policy and decide to approve an application or not. We must consider whether there was fault in how the Council did this, not whether the decision was right or wrong. Without fault in the decision-making process, we cannot question the decision itself.
15. Mrs X also complains the council is withholding information. If Mrs X is unhappy about how the Council has dealt with request for information, she can complain to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), which is better placed to consider complaints of this nature. This is the body set to deal with access to information concerns and there is no reason why Mrs X should not approach the ICO on this point.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we have not seen sufficient evidence of fault ion the way the Council considered the planning application for the site next to her home. And it is reasonable for her to complain to the ICO about the Council’s failure to provide information.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman