Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint, made on behalf of Mr Y, about the Council’s decision to grant Mr Y a planning permission imposing conditions with which he disagrees. Mr Y has used his right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate to challenge those conditions, which takes all matters related to the planning application outside our jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. Mr Y owns properties conditioned in the 1980s to be used as holiday lettings. With his representative Mr X’s assistance, he sought permission to vary the conditions to allow the properties to be residential use. Council planning officers recommended refusal of the application. The Members of the Planning and Licensing Committee considered the application and granted Mr Y a temporary permission, with conditions.
2. Mr X complains on behalf of Mr Y that:
1. the conditions included with his granted permission are unreasonable, not relevant to his property and beyond the scope of the conditions the committee Members asked for;
2. the Council’s officer misled the Committee and influenced the Members’ decision.
3. Mr Y believes the conditions mean his business will fail. He wants the Council to apply its policies differently to his premises and to discuss the matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector (PINS) acts on behalf of the responsible government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
5. 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

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

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr X has confirmed that Mr Y has used his right of appeal to the PINS against the Planning and Licensing Committee’s inclusion in his permission of conditions Mr X does not like.
8. We cannot investigate once a planning applicant has lodged their appeal with the PINS on the matter complained of. The PINS appeal takes the entire complaint outside our jurisdiction.
9. Mr Y has raised concerns about how the Council handled the application and the conduct of officers. Mr X says those issues cannot be addressed as part of the PINS appeal.
10. I agree with Mr X that the PINS appeal will not consider these Council officer conduct allegations. However, the courts have said that where someone has used their right of appeal, reference or review or remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate. The relevant case is R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916). The principle set down in this judgement applies to situations where a complainant has used a formal right of appeal other than through court proceedings, including a PINS appeal. This limitation on our jurisdiction applies even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. So we cannot investigate the Council’s prior involvement in the planning matter because Mr Y has used his formal PINS appeal right.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Mr Y used his right of appeal to the PINS against the conditions imposed on his permission by the Council’s committee Members, which takes the appealed planning matter outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman