Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for her neighbour’s extension. There was no fault in the way the Council made its planning decision.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for her neighbour’s extension. She is unhappy that the Council:
• backdated the validation date for the application;
• did not follow the size limits for extensions in its Supplementary Planning Document;
• allowed a development which will affect the outlook from windows in her home that face towards the boundary; and
• had advised the developer that similar proposals would also be unacceptable before it had refused an earlier application.

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)
4. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint or part of a complaint that is within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read the complaint and discussed it with Mrs X. I read the Council’s response to the complaint and considered documents from its planning files, including the plans and the case officer’s report.
6. I gave the Council and Mrs X an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision and took account of the responses I received.

Back to top

What I found

Planning law and guidance

7. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies in the local development plan, unless other material planning considerations indicate they should not.
8. Planning considerations include things like:
• access to the highway;
• protection of ecological and heritage assets; and
• the impact on neighbouring amenity.
9. Planning considerations do not include things like:
• views over another’s land;
• the impact of development on property value; and
• private rights and interests in land.
10. Councils may impose planning conditions to make development acceptable in planning terms. Conditions should be necessary, enforceable and reasonable in all other regards.
11. Some councils issue guidance on how they would normally make their decisions and how they generally apply planning policy. The guidance is issued in supplementary planning documents (SPD) and can be found on council websites.
12. Amongst other things, SPD guidance will often set out separation distances between dwellings to protect against overshadowing and loss of privacy.
13. Planning guidance and policy should not be treated as if it creates a binding rule that must be followed: they are for guidance only. Councils must take account their policy along with other material planning considerations. Providing councils follow the planning process properly, the decisions they reach are entirely a matter for their discretion. Only planning applicants can challenge the merits of planning judgements councils make by way of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Before councils consider planning applications, they must check what information they are likely to need. When they have the information, they need to consider an application, they ‘validate’ it and the planning process begins. The information that is usually always needed, includes:

• a location plan marking the location of the site in red;
• scaled plans of the proposal;
• a completed application with a signed certificate; and
• the correct fee payment.
1. Regulations set out the minimum requirements for how councils publicise planning applications. As well as regulatory minimum requirements, councils must also produce a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). The application notice normally gives 21 days to comment on the application.

What happened

15. Mrs X’s neighbour submitted a planning application for a ground floor extension to the side and rear of an existing 2-storey outrigger.
16. The Council publicised the application and Mrs X objected to it.
17. A planning case officer assessed the application and wrote a report setting out her recommendations. The report included:
• a description of the site and proposal;
• a planning history;
• relevant guidance and polices; and
• an assessment of the main planning considerations, including the impact on neighbours’ amenity (including Mrs X’s), the character and appearance of the design, drainage and concerns raised by an objector.
18. The application and case officer report were considered by senior planning officers, who approved it subject to conditions using delegated powers.

My findings

19. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made. Where we find fault in the decision-making process, we decide whether it caused an injustice to the complainant. To do this, we need evidence to show that, but for the fault, the outcome would have been different.
20. In this case, I can see the Council gave an opportunity to Mrs X to comment and she objected. Before it made its decision, the Council took account of her concerns and other material considerations. It is clear from the documents that the Council was aware of its SPD, the shape and location of the extension and how it related to existing buildings. It had the information it needed to make a planning decision.
21. Mrs X is concerned that the date was backdated when the application was validated. Further investigation is unlikely to find fault here, as validation dates are often backdated if there is a delay in considering application bundles and they are found to be complete. In any event, it is difficult to imagine how Mrs X would be caused any injustice by a delay in validation or from backdating it, as she was given an opportunity to comment and her concerns were considered.
22. For these reasons, I find no evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation because there was no fault in the way the Council made its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman