Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s pre-application planning advice. This is because part of the complaint is late and we cannot say the process should have identified all of the issues listed by the Council as reasons for refusing his planning application.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council delayed in providing pre-application planning advice for his proposed development of a site he bought in 2021. He also complains the advice he received was wrong, leading to the refusal of his planning application in 2023.

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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. 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

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 knew about the Council’s delay in providing the pre-application advice in late 2021. He complained to the Council about it at the time but did not refer his complaint to us until February 2023. This complaint is therefore late and I have seen nothing to show PA could not have raised the matter with us sooner. I have therefore decided not to exercise our discretion to investigate it.
7. Mr X’s complaint about the accuracy of the pre-application advice is within time as Mr X says he only became aware of the issue following the Council’s decision to refuse his planning application in 2023. However, although the Council confirms its advice provided some broad support for the architectural and environmental design it says it listed a number of issues and concerns. It also made clear the advice was based on a desktop review and that any future site visit may reveal issues with the proposal.
8. The Council says it carried out a visit during its assessment of Mr X’s planning application and other issues were revealed which contributed to the refusal. Its decision notice lists numerous reasons for refusing the application and we could not say it should have identified all these issues at the pre-application stage. We could not therefore say the advice directly resulted in the refusal of Mr X’s application.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in providing pre-application planning advice because the complaint is late. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the content of the pre-application advice because there is not enough evidence to show the Council’s decision to refuse Mr X’s application was the direct result of any fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman