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 affecting its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of his neighbour’s planning application. He says his objections were not properly considered and the Council has not taken proper account of legislation and guidance documents. Mr X suggests the development will impact on his privacy and visual amenity.

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
• 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 Mr X’s complaint, the Council’s responses and the planning application documents. 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 construct a new outbuilding in their garden in 2020. Mr X objected to the application on the grounds it was too big, too tall, not in keeping with the character of the area and that it would affect his privacy. He says the site description in the planning officer’s report is technically inaccurate and the report inappropriately references previous development which he also objected to.
6. The planning officer’s report explains how the Council decided the development was acceptable and I have seen no evidence of fault affecting its decision. While the report may inaccurately describe another outbuilding on the site there is no suggestion this wrongly affected the Council’s decision. The report addresses in detail concerns about the design of the new outbuilding, its size and impact on neighbour privacy. While Mr X considers the Council’s reference to previous development is inappropriate it is material to the planning process; the Council must take account of the situation as it currently exists and the fact Mr X objected to the previous development does not mean it can disregard it.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman