Summary: Mr C complained about the Council’s administration of a planning application appeal. Mr C said the Council did not tell him about the appeal. He says because of this he could not make further representations to the Planning Inspectorate. The Council was at fault for failing to tell Mr C about the appeal. A Judicial Review ordered the Planning Inspectorate to reconsider its decision and Mr C can make representations. This, and the Council’s apology, remedied the injustice caused by the Council’s fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Mr C, complained the Council failed to:
• tell interested parties about the planning appeal;
• forward important documents to the Planning Inspectorate;
• consider the advice of the highway authority; and
• tell neighbours of the appeal result.
2. Mr C said the Council’s failures meant he could not make further representations to the Planning Inspectorate or challenge the Planning Inspectorate’s decision. Mr C believes if he had been able to do so, the Planning Inspectorate would not have granted planning permission.

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’. 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)
4. 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

5. I considered:
• Mr C’s complaint and the information he provided;
• documents supplied by the Council; and
• relevant legislation and guidelines.
6. Mr C and the Council commented on a draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

7. The Planning Inspectorate acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. It considers appeals about a Council’s decision to refuse planning permission (Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Section 78).
8. When an appeal has been made to the Planning Inspectorate, the Council must tell interested people:
• an appeal has been made;
• any representations made to the local planning authority about the application will be sent to the Planning Inspectorate and the appellant and will be considered by the Inspector when deciding the appeal;
• how they can withdraw their earlier representations if they wish to do so;
• further written representations may be sent to the Planning Inspectorate within five weeks of the start date (and give the address and email address to which any further representation should be sent); and
• the decision will be published online.
9. Interested people are:
• any person notified or consulted in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Act 1990; and
• any other person who made representations to the Council about the application.
10. The Planning Inspectorate’s decisions can only be challenged by Judicial Review in High Court.

What happened

11. In October 2018, the Council received a planning application to erect two single storey dwellings to the rear of Mr C’s property.
12. Mr C objected to the application in December 2018.
13. In March 2019, the Council refused planning permission. The applicants appealed to the Planning Inspectorate in May 2019.
14. The Planning Inspectorate wrote to the Council in June 2019. It told the Council to tell anyone who made representations about the appeal. The Council only wrote to one of the people who had made representations and one consultee to tell them about the appeal. It did not write to the others, including Mr C.
15. In January 2020, the Planning Inspectorate upheld the appeal and granted planning permission subject to conditions. The Council published the decision on its website.
16. In October 2020, the development site was put up for sale. This was when Mr C says he became aware of the appeal and Planning Inspectorate’s decision to grant planning permission.
17. Mr C complained to the Council because he was not told about the appeal. The Council told him it made a procedural error and only notified one interested person and one consultee about the appeal, not all. The Council apologised. To ensure this did not happen again, it reinstated the role of Case Manager Lead for Appeals. This role had been made redundant during the Council’s transformation in March 2019.
18. The Council told the Planning Inspectorate about its error. The Inspectorate confirmed its decision was final.
19. Other interested people took this matter to Court for a Judicial Review. The Court ordered the Planning Inspectorate to reconsider its decision. Mr C can make representations to the Planning Inspectorate as part of its reconsideration.

Analysis

20. The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 placed a duty on the Council to tell interested people when an appeal had been made and that they could make further representations to the Planning Inspectorate. In this case, the Council failed to tell Mr C, and other interested people, of the appeal. The Council accepted this fault during its complaint investigation and apologised to Mr C.
21. Because of the Council’s fault, Mr C lost the opportunity to make further representations to the Planning Inspectorate. This injustice was remedied by the Judicial Review that ordered the Planning Inspectorate to reconsider its decision. Mr C can make representations to the Planning Inspectorate as part of its reconsideration.
22. It is positive the Council took assertive action to ensure this fault does not happen again by re-establishing the role of Case Manager Lead for Appeals.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation and uphold Mr C's complaint. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mr C. I am satisfied the Council has taken action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman