Leeds City Council (21 003 178)
Category : Planning > Planning applications
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 04 Aug 2021
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.
The complaint
- The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with his neighbour’s planning application. Mr X says the Council did not properly consider his objections and the extension will be too close to his home and cause a loss of light and privacy.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- 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.
- 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.
- In this case, I am satisfied the Council properly considered the application before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report addressed the acceptability of the development, including the impact on neighbouring properties, before deciding the application should be approved. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant planning permission, but the Council was entitled to use its professional judgment 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 it is unlikely I could find fault.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman