Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with and decided his planning application. Mr X has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate. This takes Council involvement in the planning process outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. Mr X is a planning applicant. The Council refused his 2019 application in 2020. Mr X complains the Council:
1. failed to explain why they had refused the planning application;
2. did not send a promised letter responding to issues Mr X raised at a site meeting;
3. delayed in providing the Notice of Decision.
2. Mr X says the need to appeal the refusal of permission to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) has caused additional time, distress and expense. He says officers and Councillors gave him insufficient courtesy and respect.
3. Mr X wants:
• the Ombudsman to investigate if there has been improper behaviour or irregularities by the Council’s officers and the Planning Committee Members;
• to know why the Director of Planning left their post suddenly;
• to know why the Council’s officers and Councillors did not want to engage in reasonable dialogue, and treated him discourteously and with indifference.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector (PINS) acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
6. The PINS considers appeals about:

• delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• a decision to refuse planning permission
• conditions placed on planning permission
• a planning enforcement notice.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. As part of my assessment I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X;
• issued a draft decision, inviting Mr X to reply.

Back to top

What I found

8. Mr X reports he has appealed to the PINS against the Council’s decision to refuse his planning permission. There was a delay in Mr X receiving the Decision Notice because the Council initially sent it to his former planning agents instead. The Council confirmed the delay with the PINS, so the PINS accepted the appeal after the usual deadline had passed. That appeal process is now underway.
9. Mr X’s appeal to the PINS means we have no jurisdiction to investigate any issues related to the Council’s involvement in the planning matter. The legislation prevents us from investigating Mr X’s complaint because he has used his PINS appeal.
10. I realise Mr X has raised concerns about how the Council handled the application. However, these matters are related to the planning decision which he has appealed. We cannot investigate when someone has appealed to the PINS, even if that appeal does not provide a remedy for all of the person’s claimed injustices.
11. The PINS will look at Mr X’s planning proposals afresh. They will consider the matter independently, as if it had been brought to them directly, without the prior involvement of the local planning authority which has caused Mr X’s concerns. It will be for the PINS to consider the appeal and related planning application on its own facts and merits.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X’s appeal to the PINS takes his complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman