Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s response to his pre-application planning advice query. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating and we cannot achieve the outcome he seeks from his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X is a potential planning applicant who sought pre-application advice from the Council. He complains the Council failed to provide him with the pre‑application advice he paid for.
2. Mr X says he feels let down by the planning officers and is no further forward in knowing what he could build on his land. He wants the officers to tell him what type of building they would find acceptable there.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information from Mr X, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X sought advice from the Council on what design or type of development would be acceptable in planning terms on his land. He sent in plans for a specific development he would like to build there. He also asked the Council to say, if that proposal was not acceptable, what other type of development would be. The Council officers’ reply was that they did not consider any development would be acceptable there. Mr X is not happy with that reply because it does not give him the advice he sought on particular types of developments for the plot.
6. The professional view of the Council’s officers is that there is no design, type or style of development they would deem to be acceptable on the plot. I note Mr X considers the Council agreed to also advise him of a different type of development officers would recommend for approval if the proposal he showed them was not acceptable. But that follow-up question falls away, given the officers’ advice that no type of development there would be acceptable. The Council has provided a clear response to the planning queries regarding the site. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its response to Mr X’s planning advice request to justify an investigation.
7. The outcome Mr X wants from his complaint is planning officer guidance of the types of development they might permit. We cannot order a council’s planning department to give different pre-application advice than that which they have already given using their professional judgement. We cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants from his complaint, which is a further reason why we will not investigate.
8. The Council’s planning officers have given their advice and their reasons for it. But planning advice is not binding on councils. If Mr X disagrees with the officers’ position and decides he should not be deterred by it from seeking to develop his site, he could test the advice. He may do so by submitting a valid planning application for a development he would like to build. It would then be for officers to decide the application. If the Council refuses the application or grants it with conditions with which Mr X does not agree, he could appeal that decision to the Planning Inspectorate. The Inspectorate would consider the application afresh, independent of the Council’s own planning decision or any pre‑application views.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
• there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its planning advice service to warrant an investigation; and
• we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks from his complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman