Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his neighbour’s planning application. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council affecting its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of his neighbour’s planning application. He says the Council failed to properly consider his objections and did not contact him to discuss them. He is also unhappy the planning officer did not respond to his request to visit him at home. He is concerned about the impact of the development on his property.

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

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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 reviewed the information provided by Mr X including his objection to his neighbour’s planning application, his complaint to the Council and the Council’s response. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and considered his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X’s neighbour applied for planning permission to extend their property in 2020. Mr X went to some effort to view the plans and wrote to the Council to object. He believes his neighbour’s extension will impact on his enjoyment of his property and wanted the planning officer dealing with the application to discuss it with him and visit his home. Mr X is unhappy the officer did not contact him and he believes they failed to properly consider his objections. He is concerned about the impact of building works and says the extension approved will encroach on his property.
6. I appreciate Mr X is unfamiliar with the planning process but there was no requirement for the Council to contact Mr X in response to his comments to discuss the application further, or to visit his property as part of its assessment. The planning officer’s report summarises Mr X’s objections to the proposal and explains why, on balance, the development is acceptable. I have seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision and it is therefore unlikely we could criticise it.
7. Encroachment and damage to property are private civil matters between Mr X and his neighbour and the Council cannot refuse an application based on the impact of construction works alone. Mr X may wish to seek legal advice about the requirements of the Party Wall Act 1996 but this is not something the planning process is designed to deal with.
8. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman