Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decisions to grant planning permission for their neighbour’s extension and not to take formal action for a minor breach of planning control. This is because there is no evidence of fault affecting the decisions.

The complaint

1. The complainants, Mr and Mrs X, complain the Council failed to properly consider the impact of their neighbour’s extension on their property. They also complain the extension has not been built in accordance with the approved plans.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. I have seen no evidence to show how the Council consulted on the proposed extension to Mr and Mrs X’s neighbour’s property. But the planning officer’s report shows the main concerns Mr and Mrs X raise, which include overbearing and loss of light, were considered as part of the process; we could not therefore say any fault in the consultation process wrongly affected the outcome or caused Mr and Mrs X significant injustice.
7. Mr and Mrs X are also concerned about a loss of view and the value of their property but these are not issues the Council can consider as part of the planning process.
8. More recently the Council has investigated Mr and Mrs X’s complaint that the extension has not been built in accordance with the approved plans. The Council accepts some delay on this point but it has now completed its investigation and decided not to take any further action. The Council’s decision is supported by clear rationale and it is not for us to say it is wrong. We also could not say the delay caused Mr and Mrs X significant injustice as it has ultimately decided that what their neighbour has built is acceptable for the purposes of planning control.
9. Mr and Mrs X also raise issues including trespass, damage to property and “right to light” but these are private civil matters between them and their neighbour/their builders. The Council is not responsible for resolving these issues and has no formal power to do so. If Mr and Mrs X wish to take the matter forward they may wish to take legal advice about the possibility of a claim against their neighbour.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for Mr and Mrs X’s neighbour’s extension or in its decision not to take formal enforcement action against their neighbour.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman