London Borough of Croydon (21 002 609)
Category : Planning > Planning applications
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 13 Jul 2021
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council considered a planning application from his neighbour for an extension. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
- Mr X complains about the way the Council considered a planning application from his neighbour for an extension.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
- The complainant had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.
My assessment
- Mr X submitted a planning application for a prior approval of a single storey rear extension in 2020. The Council says that the prior approval planning application meant that they could only refuse the planning application if the development unreasonably affected a neighbouring amenity.
- The Planning Officer report specifically refers to the possible loss of amenity to Mr X’s house in relation to loss of light and outlook. The Planning Officer considered photographs submitted by Mr X in his objection.
- The Planning Officer considered that the sloping roof, the set back window and wall would mean that the resulting impact upon Mr X’s amenity would not be so great as to warrant refusal of the planning application.
- Mr X argues that the planning application does not consider the impact on his health and nor did it carry out an Equality Impact assessment. The Council could only refuse a prior approval planning application based on the effect upon Mr X’s planning amenity. Therefore, there is no fault by the Council in not carrying out such assessments.
Final decision
- I do not intend to investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman