Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with applications for a development near the complainant’s home. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant who I will call X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a planning application and an application for a Certificate of Lawfulness of Proposed Use or Development (CLOPUD). X says the Council has not acted in line with policy or guidance and the development has a significant impact on the area and their property.

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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I invited X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. When a local authority receives a planning application it must look at the development plan and material planning considerations to decide if the proposal is acceptable. Material considerations relate to the use and development of the land in the public interest and includes matters such as the impact on neighbouring properties and the relevant planning policies. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material considerations in determining a planning application.
5. The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 says someone can apply to the local planning authority for a CLOPUD. A person can apply for a CLOPUD to determine if any proposed use of a building or land is lawful. This can be used to determine if a proposal would be permitted development.
6. Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action.

What happened

7. The Council received a planning application for permission to build a single storey side extension and detached garage. The Council considered the application and granted planning permission subject to conditions.
8. Shortly after this, the Council received an application for a CLOPUD to determine if the detached garage could be used as a hairdressing salon. The Council considered the application and the CLOPUD was granted.
9. The completed garage was not built in line with the approved plans as it was higher than it should be, the roof design was altered, the depth of the building was reduced and the developer included windows. A retrospective planning application was made to regularise the situation. The Council granted planning permission subject to conditions.
10. X has complained about how the Council dealt with the applications. They say the decision to grant the CLOPUD was based on inaccurate and false information and should therefore be revoked. They also say the Council failed to properly consider the retrospective application. X says the garage that has been built has a significant impact on the area and neighbour’s properties and the Council failed to take account of the many objections raised.

Assessment

11. I will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application or a CLOPUD. This is because I am unlikely to find fault.
12. X does not agree with the decision to grant the CLOPUD. They say the applicant failed to tell the Council about an existing hairdressing business and the building is likely to be used more than suggested in the application. X says the CLOPUD should be revoked in line with the Lawful Development Certificate Guidance. However, the section of the guidance they have referred to relates to applications for existing uses. This application was to establish if planning permission was needed for the proposed use of the building. I understand X believes the building will be used significantly more than stated in the CLOPUD application. But if this is the case, they can contact the Council and report a possible breach of planning control.
13. I have also considered the concerns X has raised about the Council’s decision to grant retrospective planning permission.
14. Council’s do not need to take formal enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control and informal action can often be the quickest and most cost-effective way of achieving a satisfactory result. It is also not unusual for a council to request a retrospective application to regularise a development.
15. In this case, I am satisfied the Council properly considered the acceptability of the development before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report addressed the impact on the area and residential amenity. The report also referred to the objections received. However, the case officer decided the development would not have a detrimental impact and is in line with planning policies. The officer was entitled to use their professional judgment in this regard and the Ombudsman cannot question this unless it was tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered the application, it is unlikely I could find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because I am unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman