Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for development next to the complainant’s home. It is unlikely we would find fault affected the Council’s decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr B, has complained because the Council granted planning permission for development next to his home. He says the Council did not take account of his objections and the report presented to the Planning Committee contained incomplete, inaccurate and misleading information.

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’.
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault;
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

4. We do not provide a right of appeal against a council’s decision to grant planning permission. 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

5. I have considered what Mr B said in his complaint which included the Council’s response to his concerns. I have also seen information about the planning application on the Council’s website.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Council received a planning application for development next to Mr B’s home. It had to consider the application on its planning merits and grant planning permission if there were no valid planning grounds for refusal. The Council could not refuse planning permission simply because people objected to the proposal.
7. After the Council publicised the application some local residents, including Mr B, wrote with their comments. A planning officer set out the planning issues in a report. This included a summary of the comments received and addressed the issues raised.
8. Elected Members of the Council considered the report at a meeting of its Planning Committee. Mr B addressed the Committee about his concerns about the proposed development.
9. The elected Members of the Council were clearly aware of Mr B’s concerns. Had they wished, they could have asked for more information from officers at the meeting or deferred a decision. However, they decided to grant planning permission.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. This is because I have seen nothing to suggest there was fault by the Council that is likely to have affected the decision on the planning application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman