Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s response to his request for information in relation to two planning applications. We will not investigate the complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s response to his request for information in relation to two planning applications for a development in his locale and about the Council’s refusal to address a complaint he has made through its complaints procedure.

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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information Mr X provided and gave him the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X contacted the Council seeking information on two planning applications with which he was concerned. Due to the COVID pandemic Mr X had been unable to visit Council offices to view the planning documents. The Council directed him to view them online but some of the documents did not open.
5. The Council posted Mr X a copy of the documents that had not opened.
6. Mr X contacted the Council because he was unhappy with its response and wanted to complain about an officer he had dealt with.
7. The Council wrote to him to advise that it would not be addressing his complaint under its complaints procedure. It said it had sent him the planning documents he had been unable to open online so he could comment on the planning application in question and he had then done so. It explained it was prioritising its workload during the existing challenging times and that it would not engage further with him on the matter. It told Mr X he could complaint to us if he wanted to pursue matters further.

Assessment

8. There is no evidence to suggest there has been fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X sufficient to warrant an investigation.
9. The Council sent Mr X the planning information he had been unable to see online and he made his comments on the planning application.
10. Its decision not to progress Mr X’s complaint through its complaints procedure does not appear to be unreasonable and this is not a complaint we will pursue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there appears to be insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman