Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to obtain accurate plans when determining a planning application. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The application outcome has not been affected by the alleged fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says his house was not positioned correctly on the proposed plans, so the Council has not properly assessed the impact on his property, particularly regarding the ‘45-degree’ rule.

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 impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide, for example, the alleged fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. We do not provide a right of appeal against a council’s decision on a planning application. And 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 that is likely to have affected the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Mr X, which included the Council’s complaint responses. I have also seen the case officer’s report on the Council’s website. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council received a planning application for development next to Mr X’s home. Mr X corresponded with the case officer, raising his concerns about the accuracy of the plans and the impact of the development on his home. The applicant submitted amended plans, but Mr X maintains his home is still positioned incorrectly and says the ‘45-degree’ rule is breached.
6. Whilst I appreciate Mr X’s concerns about the development, I am satisfied the application outcome has not been affected by the alleged fault. This is because the case officer, having visited the site, acknowledges the dispute about the plans in her report, and goes on to explain why a breach of the 45-degree line would still be considered acceptable. The report also considers the other planning issues Mr X had raised. The Ombudsman cannot question the Council’s judgement on the impact of the development just because Mr X disagrees with the decision, and we do not provide a right of appeal against it.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the alleged fault has not affected the application outcome and so has not caused him a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman