Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council considered applications for 5G telecommunications masts in the area where he lives. We do not consider this has caused significant personal injustice which warrants an investigation. Nor can we achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the way the Council allowed installation of five specific 5G telecommunications masts (the masts).
2. He says he suffers from Electro Magnetic Hypersensitivity and wants two existing masts removed and the permissions for the remaining three quashed.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X’s claimed injustice is his concern about the health impacts on him and other residents, which he believes may be caused by the telecommunication mast’s emissions. According to the National Planning Policy Framework, health issues related to masts are not material planning issues. It follows that we cannot take account of health concerns as injustices when considering complaints about council planning processes for telecommunications mast. While we recognise Mr X has worries about the impacts he believes may happen because of the masts, those concerns are not directly caused by the Council’s planning process and decisions.
7. There is insufficient significant personal injustice to Mr X or other residents caused by the Council’s planning process, which could not consider health issues, to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we do not consider the Council’s actions has caused the personal injustice claimed.
9. Also, we cannot require the Council to quash permissions for masts yet to be built or the removal of those which already exist.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman