Summary: Mr X complains about the grant of planning permission by the Council for a change of use (from commercial to residential) to a nearby property. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council causing significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the grant of planning permission by the Council for a change of use (from commercial to residential) to a nearby property.

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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the comments of the complainant and the Council and the complainant has commented on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X complains that the Council unreasonably granted planning permission for a building at the end of the road on which he lives. He says the proposed building is poorly designed for the future residents.
5. The Ombudsman must be satisfied that a significant personal injustice could occur to a complainant following alleged fault by the Council. I will only therefore consider the planning permission in relation to the effect upon Mr X.
6. The Council says that the previous planning permissions for change of use on the land meant that the Council could only refuse the planning application on the grounds of highways/transport, contamination, flooding risks or noise from the commercial use of the site.
7. There were no objections from Highways as they considered there would be no increase in traffic connected to the development. Mr X refers to possible parking problems. The Planning Officer report refers to parking issues which may impact on neighbouring streets. The Council’s policy seeks to minimise car parking and promote sustainable transport options instead. The report lists the available car parking spaces and concludes that the planning application satisfied the Council’s requirements for on-site parking.
8. I am satisfied that the Council properly considered the planning application in relation to the only factor that could have any significant effect upon Mr X; car parking.
9. In the absence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning application the Ombudsman would not be critical of the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I do not intend to investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman