Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and an application for listed building consent for a development near the complainant’s home. 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 his neighbour’s planning and listed building consent applications. Mr X says the development will cause a loss of light to his home and is not sympathetic to the grade II listed building. Mr X says his home will lose value and the Council did not visit the site before granting permission for the development.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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.
6. 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.
7. In this case, I am satisfied the Council properly considered the applications before granting planning permission and listed building consent. The case officer’s reports addressed the acceptability of the development, including the impact on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area. The report also said the new fence would not have an unacceptable impact in terms of overshadowing. The case officer consulted the Council’s conservation officer, and it was decided the development would conserve the character of the listed building.
8. Mr X says his home will lose value and the Council did not visit the site before granting planning permission. But loss of value is not a material planning matter and there was also no requirement for officers to visit the site before granting planning permission.
9. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant planning permission and listed building consent, 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.

Back to top

Final decision

10. 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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman