Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the quality of the pre-planning application advice given to Mr X by the Council. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. Mr X also complains about the way the Council dealt with his planning application. All matters relating to the planning application are outside our jurisdiction. This is because he has already appealed to the Planning Inspector.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the pre-planning application advice given to him by the Council.
2. He also complains about the way the Council processed his application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended).
5. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about decisions to refuse planning permission.
6. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mr X paid for pre-planning application advice for a property he wishes to build.
10. Pre-planning application advice cannot be assumed to guarantee the success or otherwise of a future planning application. The Council advised Mr X that development on the site was acceptable in principle. But it also advised it could not support the proposal because of significant concerns about the design and lack of technical and drainage information.
11. Mr X changed the design of the property before submitting his planning application. However the Council refused planning permission because:
• The proposal lacked evidence to show the site is not in agricultural or horticultural use; and
• The size, scale height and mass of the proposed building is unacceptable.
12. The Council’s website states that “pre-application advice provided is made at officer level only and does not constitute a formal decision of the Council. Any views or opinions expressed, are given without prejudice to the consideration by the Council of any formal planning application, which will be subject to wider consultation and publicity. Although the case officer may indicate the likely outcome of a formal planning application from their professional point of view, no guarantees can or will be given about the decision that will be made on any such application.”
13. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint. This is because pre-application advice is advice only which is non-binding on the Council. It is not an instruction by the Council for an application to make a specific type of application. It is unlikely that further investigation will lead us to find fault in the Council’s actions.
14. Mr X has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate against the Council’s refusal of her application. The Planning Inspector is an impartial expert whose decisions are binding on a council.
15. The Ombudsman cannot investigate matters where someone has already used their appeal right. This restriction applies even if the appeal could not address all the issues complained about.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
• We are unlikely to find fault in the way the Council provided pre-planning advice; and
• All matters related to his planning application are out of our jurisdiction as he has already appealed to the Planning Inspector.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman