Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about the way the Council considered a planning application for a barn conversion near their home. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because we do not consider Mr & Mrs X have suffered sufficient personal injustice to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complain about the way the Council has considered a planning application for a barn conversion near them. They say the case officer report contains errors and the consultation procedure was flawed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. 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, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information provided by the complainant which includes the Council’s responses to their complaints. I also considered the planning application and associated documents on the Council’s website.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr & Mrs X say there were no site notices and they were not given enought time to respond to the planning application.
5. They also say the case officer report contained errors including:
• The stated number of door and window openings in the proposed property is wrong,
• a failure to include details of a previous refusal for planning permission by the Council; and
• implication that an access track exists
6. I note the case officer report includes details of Mr & Mrs X’s objections to the application. Therefore, I cannot agree they suffered a significant injustice because of the way the Council carried out the consultation on the application.
7. I have also considered the location plan and maps included with the planning application. Mr & Mrs X live some distance from the application site. They will not suffer from overlooking or overshadowing. It does not appear they will suffer any significant adverse impact on their amenity as a result of the conversion of the barn to a home.
8. Therefore, because I do not consider Mr & Mrs X have suffered a significant personal injustice as a result of the Council’s decision to grant planning permission, I do not intend to investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. I will not investigate this complaint. I do not consider Mr & Mrs X have suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants an Ombudsman’s investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman