Summary: Ms X complains about how the Council dealt with a planning application in which it had an interest. The Ombudsman discontinued this investigation because Ms X has not suffered a personal injustice to warrant pursuit of the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to here as Ms X, complains about how the Council dealt with a planning application in which it had an interest. Ms X questions the information and advice provided to the planning committee when it considered the planning application. Ms X says:
• Officers should not have scheduled a meeting for consideration of the planning application when the minutes for a previous meeting were unavailable. The planning application was deferred at the previous meeting.
• Officers failed to provide the full information specified in the reason for deferral of the application at the previous committee meeting.
• The committee report contained non-material information.
2. Ms X wants the Council to review training of officers who contribute to planning reports; implement a system to ensure non-material information is not included in planning reports; the planning committee meeting to be declared void and the application reheard at a future committee meeting; and the reasons for deferral of the planning application are fully considered along with a review of car parking needs in the city centre.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate something that affects all or most of the people in a council’s area. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(7), as amended)
5. The Ombudsman investigates 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint,
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

6. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered the complaint and background information provided by Ms X and the Council. I discussed matters with Ms X. I sent my initial thoughts on the complaint to Ms X and the Council and invited the comments of both parties on it.

Back to top

What I found

8. The Council proposed to build a multistorey car park in the city centre. The proposal was put before the planning committee. The committee approved it. Ms X is concerned the decision was unsafe because crucial information was not made available to the committee.
9. But Ms X does not live nearby the proposed car park. So, she has not suffered a personal injustice from the Council’s decision to approve the application. The car park may or may not increase traffic congestion in the city centre. That is a matter that affects all or most people in the area rather than Ms X in particular. This is why there is no personal injustice that warrants further pursuit of this complaint by the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman is statutorily barred from investigating complaints about matters which affect all or most inhabitants of a local area.
10. I recognise Ms X’s interest in the application arises from a desire to ensure the Council follows the correct planning procedures. But there must be a personal injustice that warrants the involvement of the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I closed this complaint because Ms X did not suffer a personal injustice that warrants investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman