Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about pre-application planning advice from the Council and its subsequent decision on Mr X’s planning application. This is because the complaint is a late complaint and because Mr X had appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate we would reasonable have expected him to have used.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council changed its mind from pre-application advice stage to the decision it made that the site of his proposed development was not sufficiently isolated to satisfy National Planning Policy Framework guidance or the Council’s own policies. He says he has lost a significant amount of money because the Council did not make its decision on his application in accordance with the pre-application advice he had received.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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))
4. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals, including those against a decision to refuse planning permission.
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, including its response to his complaint.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. In 2018 Mr X received pre-application planning advice from the Council about a development he wished to carry out.
9. Later he submitted an application and in 2021 he received the Council’s decision to refuse permission for the proposed development. Mr X believes the decision he received was contrary to the pre-application advice given to him.
10. The Council addressed Mr X’s complaint about the matter, finding no fault and pointing out that pre-application advice is given on a without prejudice basis and that he had appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate against its decision on the application.
11. The two restrictions highlighted above apply to Mr X’s complaint and place it outside our jurisdiction. Mr X knew of the matters about which he complains over 12 months ago and I see no grounds which warrant exercising discretion to investigate them now. Moreover, Mr X had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against the decision on the application and as he had this alternative remedy available which we would reasonably have expected him to have used, the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction on this ground too.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the complaint is a late complaint and because Mr X had appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate we would reasonably have expected him to have used.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman