Eastleigh Borough Council (19 005 621)

Statement Upheld Planning applications 22-Feb-2021

Summary: There is evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with the complainants concerns about an unauthorised drainage system and wall, built on a development near to their homes. The Council has agreed to arrange for an enforcement officer to assess the site.

South Gloucestershire Council (20 005 147)

Statement Not upheld Planning applications 22-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr B complained that the Council failed to take appropriate action in response to his complaints about out of hours working on a nearby building site, which caused significant disturbance to him and his family. He also complained about the way it dealt with his complaints. We did not find fault in the actions of the Council.

Durham County Council (20 003 608)

Statement Not upheld Planning applications 22-Feb-2021

Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council dealt with a planning application from a nearby business and her associated complaint about noise nuisance. There was no fault in the Council's actions.

Leeds City Council (20 001 535)

Statement Not upheld Planning applications 18-Feb-2021

Summary: The Council was aware of all relevant facts, including the impact on Mr X's property, when it granted a neighbour's planning application. There is no evidence of fault in the way the decision was made.

London Borough Of Barnet (20 006 389)

Statement Not upheld Planning applications 17-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr X complained the Council gave planning permission for a neighbouring extension without fully considering the impact on his residential amenity and in particular without requiring a daylight/sunlight impact assessment. The Council properly considered the planning applications and used its professional judgement to determine any harm was not significant enough to warrant refusal. There was no fault by the Council.

Liverpool City Council (20 004 048)

Statement Not upheld Planning applications 17-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr and Mrs C complained the Council failed to properly consider a planning application for a telecommunications mast near their property. Mr and Mrs C said this would cause an overbearing and visually intrusive development as well as noise nuisance. We have found no evidence of fault.

Herefordshire Council (20 003 865)

Statement Not upheld Planning applications 17-Feb-2021

Summary: The Council followed the correct process to determine a planning application. The Council was entitled to rely on the views of Highways England on the grounds of road safety; this professional consultee raised no objection to the development.

Middlesbrough Borough Council (19 010 587)

Statement Upheld Planning applications 17-Feb-2021

Summary: The Council is at fault for failing to consider the potential use of a fire escape as a balcony when it granted planning permission for an external door to a property opposite Mrs X's home. The Council should pay Mrs X £1679 to recognise the permanent loss of amenity and £250 to acknowledge their time and trouble pursuing the complaint

Northumberland County Council (20 002 609)

Statement Not upheld Planning applications 15-Feb-2021

Summary: The Council was not at fault for the way it considered a planning application to remove obscured glazing from a window which faces Mr X's property.

Luton Borough Council (20 002 080)

Statement Upheld Planning applications 15-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not properly deal with a planning application near his home and has not investigated concerns about noise and dust. The Council is at fault because it did not follow its complaints policy. Mr X cannot be clear how the Council is responding to his complaints. The Council has agreed to write to Mr X to clarify how it will respond to him and issue guidance to staff to ensure it follows its complaints policy.