Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to inform a planning agent of the likely outcome of his clients’ application, contrary to the assurances it had previously given that it would do so. The Council has already taken, or proposed to take, satisfactory action in response to the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr B, says the Council agreed to inform him of the likely outcome of his clients’ lawful development certificate application, but then failed to do so, and proceeded with partially refusing it instead.
2. Mr B says it was frustrating and embarrassing having to explain to his clients what had happened, despite the Council’s previous assurances that it would be in touch if anything was wrong with the application. He says the Council’s apology is of no consolation to his professional relationship with his clients and the potential damage to his reputation. Mr B thinks the Council should pay a token form of monetary compensation to reflect the time and resources he spent on pursuing his subsequent complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• the Council has already taken, or proposed to take, satisfactory action in response to the complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6) & (7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered:
• Mr B’s complaint to the Ombudsman;
• The complaint correspondence between Mr B and the Council;
• Mr B’s comments on a draft version of this complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. In responding to the complaint, the Council said that it is a matter of public record that the Council’s Planning service is under considerable pressure at the moment and this is having an adverse effect on the quality of service being provided. Its says a report on the situation was recently considered by the Council's Strategy and Resources Committee, where Members discussed the situation in some detail and approved a number of recommendations, including an increase in resources via the recruitment of additional permanent staff and the temporary withdrawal of some of the non-statutory aspects of the service.
6. The Council has also asked the Planning team to ensure there are clear notes on case records when specific requests like Mr B’s have been made, and it says it is committed to working positively with all applicants/agents.
7. The Council also apologised that the service Mr B received fell short of the standard it would like to deliver.

Assessment

8. The Council had agreed to contact Mr B if there was a problem with the application, but it failed to do so. This amounts to fault.
9. But I am satisfied the Council’s acknowledgement of the fault, along with its apology to Mr B and the wider organisational/procedural changes proposed for its Planning service, is a satisfactory way to address the complaint.
10. In reaching this view, I am mindful that it is open to Mr B to share this statement with his clients, so they are aware of where the fault lies. The statement will also appear on our website. And if Mr B experiences the same problem in the future, it would be open to him to pursue a new complaint, and the Ombudsman could then reassess whether further remedial action is necessary. Finally, there is inevitably time and trouble involved in bringing a complaint. But this only generally requires a remedy when there has been a fault in the way Council considered the complaint, which meant the complainant incurred time and trouble above what is considered usual. I do not consider that this is the case here.
11. With reference to paragraph 3 above, I therefore do not consider the Ombudsman should start an investigation into Mr B’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint. This is because the Council has taken, or proposed to take, satisfactory action in response to the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman