Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a planning decision. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Ms B, complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a garage to be converted into an annexe. Ms B says the Council did not visit her property to assess the impact on her garden, which will now be overlooked. Ms B says the Council did not give proper consideration to her objections. Ms B says the Council’s decision has affected her mental health and will result in a reduction to the value of her home. Ms B would like the Council to insist that changes are made to the windows. Ms B would also like compensation for the loss of value of her property.

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))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms B and planning records on the Council website.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council was not required to visit Ms B’s property to assess the application. It is clear from the Council’s case report that it was fully aware that Ms B’s garden is immediately to the rear of the application site. The Council considered Ms B’s concerns about overlooking but decided the proposal was acceptable.
7. The Council explained its reasons. The Council also imposed a condition which prevents the installation of further windows without a planning application being put in to the Council.
8. The Council could not consider some of Ms B’s objections (including that an extraction fan might be needed in the rear wall next to her garden) because they were not material planning considerations.
9. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation of Ms B’s complaint. Unless there is fault in the way this decision was reached, we cannot say the decision was right or wrong.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman