Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled a planning application. It was reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. Mr X has not suffered significant injustice in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council decided to refuse his planning application. He complained about delays and the Council’s lack of contact in the planning process. Mr X said the Council’s actions have caused his business operations to pause and financial problems. Mr X said this has caused him stress.
2. Mr X said he wanted the Council to work with him to make the application acceptable and does not feel he should pay a fee for future applications.
3. Mr X said the Council did not reply to his complaints in line with its complaints policy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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)
6. 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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. Mr X said the Council has unfairly refused his planning application to build a first floor extension. Mr X said the reasons for refusing the application could have been overcome with some minor amendments.
11. We will not investigate complaints about matters which carry a right of appeal to a tribunal or a government minister. Complaints about planning refusal and delay in determination may be appealed to the Planning Inspectorate which acts on behalf of the Secretary of State and is the proper authority to decide planning appeals. It was reasonable for Mr X to appeal about any delay or refusal of his application.
12. Mr X has complained the planning officer did not properly communicate with him. But I do not consider that the injustice Mr X suffered because of any fault with how the officer communicated with him would be significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.
13. Mr X wants the Council to waive a further application fee. The Council has explained why it will not waive the fee. The Council has also offered to have a pre-application discussion with Mr X free of charge.
14. Mr X is unhappy with how the Council handled his complaint. We will not investigate how the Council handled the complaint where we are not investigating the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it was reasonable to use his appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate. Mr X has not suffered significant injustice in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman