Planning applications


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Daventry District Council (18 016 886)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 03-Sep-2019

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint that alleged fault with the Council's investigation of an alleged breach of planning control involving a garage at a neighbouring property.

  • Daventry District Council (18 016 944)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 03-Sep-2019

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint that alleged fault with the Council's investigation of an alleged breach of planning control involving a garage at a neighbouring property.

  • Central Bedfordshire Council (18 016 902)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 03-Sep-2019

    Summary: We have discontinued the investigation into complaints about the Council's actions on a breach of planning control and related applications to vary and discharge planning conditions. This is because the complainant had rights of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate which he did not exercise but could have done.

  • Daventry District Council (18 017 147)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 03-Sep-2019

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint that alleged fault with the Council's investigation of an alleged breach of planning control.

  • Rushcliffe Borough Council (17 020 157)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 02-Sep-2019

    Summary: Mrs B complains that the Council has not responded properly to her complaints about breaches of planning control, the Party Wall Act and the building regulations by her neighbour in constructing a rear and side extension. She considers that this has adversely affected her amenity. The Ombudsman has found no fault in the way the Council responded to Mrs B's complaints about breaches of planning control. The other parts of her complaint are outside the Ombudsman's jurisdiction.

  • East Devon District Council (18 015 485)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 30-Aug-2019

    Summary: The Council is not at fault in how it reached its decision to grant planning permission for a neighbour's development.

  • Rushcliffe Borough Council (18 017 354)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 30-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about the actions of the Council in respect of enforcement matters arising from development next to his home. The Ombudsman finds no fault by the Council in this matter.

  • Royal Borough of Greenwich (19 000 240)

    Statement Upheld Planning applications 29-Aug-2019

    Summary: The Council failed to consider a telecommunications prior approval application within the prescribed 56 day timescale meaning deemed permission was granted. This failure to consider the application within 56 days and communicate the decision is fault. However, the Council could not refuse the application on the grounds put forward by Mr X and so the outcome would have been the same and permission granted. Mr X has not suffered a significant injustice as a direct result of the fault in this case.

  • Wealden District Council (19 002 264)

    Statement Upheld Planning applications 29-Aug-2019

    Summary: Ms X complains about the Council granting planning permission at two sites near to her property and not notifying her. There was fault by the Council as it did not notify Ms X about the planning application. However, this did not cause any significant injustice to Ms X so no remedy is necessary.

  • London Borough of Bromley (18 019 556)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 28-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council gave inadequate consideration to his residential amenity when determining two applications on either side of his property. The information provided shows the Council gave proper consideration to the effect on his residential amenity including the effect of the slope of the road and the staggering of the properties.