Summary: We will not investigate how the Council dealt with a planning application for development close to the complainant’s home. We are unlikely to find fault by the Council caused the complainant significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr B, has complained about how the Council dealt with a planning application for development near his home.

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’.
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault;
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

4. 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 that is likely to have affected the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered what Mr B said in his complaint. I have also seen information about the application on the Council’s website.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of events

6. The Council received an application for planning permission for development near Mr B’s home. It had to consider the application on its planning merits and grant permission if there were no valid grounds for refusal. It could not refuse permission simply because people objected to the proposal.
7. The Council advised Mr B and other nearby residents about the application. Mr B commented on the application. Planning officers prepared a report which was considered by elected Members on the Council’s Planning Committee. The report summarised and addressed Mr B’s comments. He also addressed the Committee meeting.
8. The Committee decided to grant planning permission subject to a legal agreement with the applicant. However, the applicant later withdrew the application.

Analysis

9. I have seen nothing to suggest fault in how the Council dealt with the planning application. Even if this were not the case, I do not consider Mr B can have been caused injustice that would justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council has caused Mr B any significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman