Summary: Mrs B complains about the Council’s consideration of a planning application for an extension to the house next to her. She did not receive any notification of the planning application and considers the Council may have been biased in favour of the applicant as a previous planning application had been refused. She considers the development will have an adverse impact on her in particular from overlooking from a bay window at first floor. There was no fault in the Council’s consideration of the planning application.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complains about the Council’s consideration of a planning application for an extension to the house next to her. She did not receive any notice of the planning application and considers the Council may have been biased in favour of the applicant as a previous planning application had been refused. She considers the development will have an adverse impact on her in particular from overlooking from a bay window at first floor.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the complaint and spoke to Mrs B. I asked the Council for its comments on the complaint and additional information. I sent a copy of a draft of this statement to Mrs B and the Council and invited their comments

Back to top

What I found

What happened

5. Mrs B lives in an end-terraced house. The neighbour in the house on the other side of the one to which her house is joined applied for planning permission for a two storey side and rear extension. This would fill in the gap between the two properties and bring it up next to Mrs B’s two storey extension.
6. The Council refused the application because of the impact it would have on the amenity of the neighbouring property on the other side to Mrs B. The applicant appealed against that decision to the Planning Inspectorate. The Planning Inspectorate is an independent body that hears appeals against a refusal to grant planning permission. The Inspectorate upheld the Council’s decision to refuse the application.
7. The neighbour put in another planning application. This reduced and changed the development so it would have less impact on the other neighbour. The Council approved the application.
8. Mrs B had not received any notice of the application but on checking the Council’s website saw the application had been approved. She contacted the Council and complained. She was not happy with the responses she had from the Council so complained to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

Notification of the planning application

9. The Council will normally notify adjoining properties of an application such as this one. The Council’s records show that a letter was sent to Mrs B’s home. Mrs B didn’t receive it. I cannot say why this was but I cannot say it was because of some fault by the Council.

Consideration of the planning application

10. Mrs B considered it was odd the Council had approved this application when it had refused the previous one. And that decision had been confirmed by the Planning Inspectorate. She had wondered whether there was any undue influence or relationship between the applicant and the Council officers who decided the application. The Council has said the senior officers who still work for the Council do not have any personal relationship with the applicant. The case officer no longer works for the Council but the Council was not aware of any personal relationship between them and the applicant.
11. There is no evidence to show there was any relationship between an officer of the Council who was involved in the consideration of the application and the applicant. I have no grounds to take this point further.
12. The application was decided by officers under delegated powers. That would be normal for this sort of application. The report on the application refers to the previous application that was refused and explains how this is different and why the officer considers it has overcome the previous reasons for refusal. The officer said the two-storey side element will be all alongside the similar extension at Mrs B’s home, and there would be no adverse effect on her property.
13. Mrs B is concerned about the bay window at first floor. The report specifically refers to the bay window. The report does not refer to the impact on Mrs B’s property from the bay window but the Council has commented that it considers it to be acceptable. The bay window projects slightly meaning there is a possibility of a view from the side window of the bay down and into Mrs B’s garden. There is no specific analysis of this by the Council but I do not consider that to be fault. In responding to me the Council said that, in planning terms, the window is an entirely unexceptional addition to the property and would not result in any significant harm to the amenity of neighbours or the character of the area. I accept the Council’s view.

Mrs B’s contact with the Council

14. As Mrs B had not been notified of the application she saw by chance on the Council’s website that it had been submitted and approved. This was on the day that the approval was issued. The Council’s records show that the permission was sent in the morning. It seems likely that Mrs B tried to phone the Council but could not speak to anyone and then emailed in the afternoon asking someone to call her. There was a conversation in the afternoon with the officer who had approved the application the previous day. It seems likely that resulted in Mrs B agreeing to look at the plans on the website over the weekend (this was a Friday). When Mrs B tried to contact the officer on the Monday she could not speak to him. I am not certain from the information I have seen but I think she then submitted a formal complaint which the Council responded to that week.
15. Although it was on the same day that the planning permission has been issued that Mrs B contacted the Council there was no basis for the Council to recall or revisit the decision it had made. The officer cannot remember the conversation with Mrs B but thinks it is likely he would have invited Mrs B to look at the plans so he could then talk them through with her. I do not know why he was not available the next week. This is not a significant point although it would have been better if Mrs B could have spoke to someone so they could explain the Council’s view of the application. But I cannot say there was fault here by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

16. There was no fault in the Council’s consideration of the planning application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman