Summary: Mrs X complains the Council’s decisions on certain planning and licensing applications are affected by bias, causing her distress, outrage and financial loss. The Ombudsman finds no fault in the Council’s decision making.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision making on planning and licensing applications on a nearby site. She says the Council’s decisions are affected by bias because various officers have conflicts of interests. Mrs X says she has suffered distress, outrage and financial loss as a result.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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)
4. 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 it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. 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

7. I spoke to Mrs X and I reviewed documents provided by Mrs X and the Council. I also reviewed documents available on the Council’s website. I gave Mrs X and the Council the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision and I considered the comments provided.

Back to top

What I found

Law; planning process

8. A council must decide on a planning application in line with the local development plan, unless there are material considerations that suggest otherwise. Material considerations include the impact on amenities, such as loss of privacy. A council must be able to show that it has considered material planning considerations.
9. Planning officers make most decisions but a council may refer others to a planning committee.

Law; planning enforcement

10. Planning enforcement action is discretionary. It is for the council to decide whether it is expedient to take action: a council does not have to carry out enforcement action simply because the public wants or expects it to.

Council’s Constitution

11. The Council’s Constitution is available online. I note the version available online was first published in 2001 and subject to amendments as recently as March 2020. However, the sections relevant to this complaint have not been amended. Of relevance, this says:
12. “An employee aware, or who should be aware, of conflict with an interest or conflict with an outside commitment when conducting business of the Council, and who attends a meeting at which a relevant matter is to be considered, must disclose to the meeting the fact that they have such an interest or commitment. Unless they have been given a formal dispensation by the Chief Executive or Monitoring Officer, they must not participate in any discussion of the matter - apart from making representations, giving evidence or answering questions in accordance with other procedures (for example disciplinary hearings). Also, they must not remain in the meeting room whilst the matter is being debated or participate in any decision on the matter at the meeting.”

What happened

13. Mrs X lives near to a farm. In 2018 the farm owner was granted a license to use the land for weddings and festivals. In 2019 the farm owner applied for planning permission to use the land as a wedding venue and also applied to carry out alterations to a listed building.
14. A planning officer produced a report on the first application for the planning committee to consider. I note the following relevant points:
• The officer summarised objections received. This included concerns about noise and earlier breaches of planning control. Concerns over the poor quality of, and inaccurate information supplied with, the planning application. And the Council’s decision on another planning application, which said the site was not a suitable location for business operations.
• The highways authority was satisfied with the proposal.
• Environmental health said there was no evidence noise would unreasonably disturb residents however the Council could impose conditions under the Licensing Act 2003 and the Environmental Protection Act 1990 if necessary, following any complaints.
• The Conservation officer and archaeological adviser had no concerns.
• The Crime prevention advisor recommended CCTV in addition to that required under the license.
• The fire and rescue service had concerns about access.
• The Secretary of State for Transport said the occupant of the site was in breach of tenancy conditions.
• The Registration service confirmed it would grant a license for the owner to hold weddings.
• The officer referred to relevant law, policy and the local development plan.
• The officer set out their views on the application, with reference to relevant law and policy.
• In relation to the Council’s decision on another planning application, the officer noted different policies applied in that case and there could be other site specific factors. The decision in that case did not mean any site in the area would be unsuitable for a business.
• The officer recommended the Council grant planning permission.
15. The farm owner also applied for listed building consent for various alterations to the property. A planning officer produced a report on this, for the planning committee to consider. I note the following relevant points:
• The officer summarised objections received.
• The officer referred to relevant law, policy and the development plan.
• The officer set out their views on the application with reference to relevant law and policy.
• The officer recommended the Council grant planning permission.
16. A planning committee considered both applications at a hearing. The committee heard from Council officers and objectors. The published minutes of the meeting demonstrate the committee considered the officers’ views and the concerns raised.
17. The planning committee decided to grant planning permission on both applications.
18. Mrs X sent correspondence to the Council following its decision. However, the Council says it considered this an expression of her view and so did not provide a response.
19. In October 2019 Mrs X told the Council the spouse of the farm owner was a Council officer and had attended the licensing meeting in 2018 and the planning committee meetings in 2019 in breach of its Constitution.
20. The Council explained its employee’s attendance was in their private capacity i.e. as a member of the public. They did not have any role in the handling of the application in any way prior to or since the meeting. Therefore, this was not a breach of its Constitution.
21. In December Mrs X complained to the Council. I have summarised her complaint:
• A Council officer who is also a spouse of the planning applicant attended planning and licensing hearings as a member of the public. While the Council says it did not need to declare this, she believes it should have done.
• Some officers at the planning committee meeting had connections with the planning applicant representing a conflict of interest, but they did not declare this.
• She felt Council officers did not act professionally and impartially during the planning committee meeting, given their tone and conduct.
• Her concerns about compliance with licensing conditions have not been addressed.
• She is unhappy about the views expressed by the Council at the licensing review hearing in November 2019.
22. The Council responded. In brief it said:
• There were no connections or conflicts of interest as Mrs X suggests.
• It considers the conduct of officers acceptable. In any event it is the planning committee and not the officers who decide on the application.
• Officers did act properly during the committee meeting.
• Licensing officers acted properly.
23. Mrs X complained further. In summary she said:
• The Council has not properly addressed her complaints and so she will ask specific questions.
• The Council should confirm whether the relationships and connections are as she believes and whether it considers this to be a conflict of interest.
• Explain why a Council officer did not provide relevant information to the planning committee.
• Explain why the Council did not take planning enforcement action on a breach of planning regarding UPVC windows, first raised three years ago,
• Confirm whether all licensing and planning conditions have been met, in particular regarding CCTV and noise.
24. The Council provided its final response. In brief it:
• Explained the officer relationships and that it did not consider there was any conflict of interest or breach of its Constitution.
• Said it was not appropriate for an officer to provide the planning committee with information on recent unproven noise complaints or licensing matters.
• Explained it did not take enforcement action on a breach because a planning application was made to regularise the breach.
• Said some matters were still under investigation however it can confirm CCTV has been installed.
25. Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman that there were conflicts of interests which affected the Council’s decision making and resulted in constitutional breaches. Further, that the Council’s final response did not address her concerns in full.
26. Mrs X wanted the Council to put procedures and checks in place to prevent any bias or conflict of interest. She felt there should be a root and branch review to ensure consistency in decisions.

Findings

27. It is not within my remit to say whether or not Council officer relationships or connections to a planning applicant amount to a conflict of interest. However, I can review how the Council considered this and whether it followed a proper decision making process.
28. The Council considered Mrs X’s concerns in light of its Constitution, spoke to relevant officers and decided there were no conflicts of interest. I cannot say the Council’s judgement is right or wrong. The Council took account of relevant information and applied relevant policy. I am unable to find fault in the Council’s decision making process.
29. I note the Council’s final complaint response was not as detailed as Mrs X would have liked. However, I am satisfied the Council addressed each of the questions raised and therefore I do not find fault.
30. The information available shows the Council considered both planning applications in line with the local plan, taking account of material considerations. The Council considered all relevant information and there is no evidence it took account of irrelevant or inaccurate information. There is no evidence of any bias in the Council’s decision, rather it is reasoned and supported by the information available. I therefore find no fault in the Council’s decision making on the planning applications.
31. Mrs X considers the Council’s decision on the earlier licensing application was also affected by bias due to conflicts of interest. However, the Council does not accept that to be the case and I find no fault in its decision making in this regard. I will not investigate how the Council decided the licensing application itself because this happened more than 12 months ago and so any complaint is late. And, because it is unlikely I will find fault and I will not be able to achieve the outcome Mrs X wants.

Back to top

Final decision

32. Subject to further comments by Mrs X and the Council, I find no fault in the Council’s decision making.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman