Summary: We do not propose to investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a planning application for a development near his home. He says it did not properly consider his objections and the development will have a significant impact on his 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 Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision and have considered his comments in response.

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.

What happened

5. The Council received a planning application for a single storey side and rear extension. It considered the application and granted planning permission subject to conditions.
6. Mr X is unhappy with how the Council has dealt with the application. He says the new extension will be overbearing, too close to his home and will cause a loss of day and sunlight to his property. Mr X also says the development will breach the 45 degree light test and the planning decision was based on inaccurate plans. Mr X says the Council failed to properly consider his concerns and the new extension will have a significant impact on his home.

Assessment

7. I will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application for a development near Mr X’s home. This is because I am unlikely to find fault by the Council.
8. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body for planning decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how a decision was made.
9. In this case, I am satisfied the case officer properly considered the acceptability of the development, including the impact on neighbouring properties, before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report addressed the impact on Mr X’s property but decided the proposal would not be overbearing and there would be sufficient space between the dwellings to prevent overlooking. The case officer acknowledged there would be some loss of sun and day light but said this would not be significant. I understand Mr X disagrees and says the extension will breach the 45 degree light test. But compliance with the 45 degree rule is not part of the Council’s policy and would also not apply to side facing windows. The case officer did also still consider the impact the development would have on loss of light before deciding the application was acceptable.
10. Mr X says the case officer did not visit the site and his concerns about the accuracy of the plans were not addressed. But there is no duty on the Council to visit a site when assessing a proposal and the Council has explained it was satisfied it had enough information to determine the application.
11. The case officer was entitled to use their professional judgement to decide the proposal was acceptable. The Ombudsman cannot question this decision unless it was tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered the application before granting planning permission it is unlikely I could find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

12. 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