Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council deciding to grant planning permission for development next to the complainant’s home. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is nothing to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has granted planning permission for development next to his home. In particular, he said:

• A planning officer gave advice to the developer.
• There was no site visit to his home.
• Members of the Council did not give proper consideration to the planning application.

2. Mr Y also says the Council did not follow its complaints procedure when responding to his concerns.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr Y which included the Council’s responses to him. I have also seen information on the Council’s website.
5. I considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council received a planning application for development next to Mr Y’s home. It had to consider the planning merits of the application and grant planning permission if there were no valid grounds for refusal.
7. The Council publicised the application and Mr Y sent his comments on it. A planning officer set out the planning issues in a report which addressed the issues Mr Y had raised. The elected Members on the Council’s Planning Committee decided there were no valid grounds to refuse the application and so granted planning permission.
8. I consider the Council’s final response to Mr Y was full and proportionate. I do not consider investigation would provide us with anything new of significance.

Back to top

Final decision

9. I have decided we will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint about the planning issues. While I recognise Mr Y disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant planning permission, we do not provide a right of appeal against it. I have seen nothing to suggest fault in how the Council considered the planning application that is likely to have affected the outcome.
10. The Council has accepted it delayed responding to Mr Y’s complaint and that he only received a response after he complained to us. It has paid him £150 to recognise this which I regard as appropriate.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman