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

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with a planning application for a development near his home. Mr X says the case officer failed to consider his concerns about the proposal and misled the planning committee members. Mr X also says the case officer’s report included incorrect 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• 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. Mr X has raised many concerns about how the case officer dealt with the application and the impact the development would have on his property. However, I do not consider Mr X has suffered any significant injustice because of any alleged fault with how the application was assessed as ultimately the application was refused and therefore permission has not been given for the development.
6. Mr X says the applicant has appealed to the Planning Inspector against the Council’s decision to refuse planning permission. He is concerned the decision to refuse planning permission may be overturned. However, the Inspector will consider the proposal afresh, and residents had the opportunity to make representations on the appeal. It will be for the Planning Inspector to decide if the appeal should be allowed and the Ombudsman cannot investigate decisions made by the Inspector.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman