Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning applications. This is because the complainant used his right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. The complainant can seek a remedy in court if he believes the Council has been negligent.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with his planning applications. Mr X has raised concerns about how the Council dealt with the first application. He also says there were many mistakes with how it assessed his second application which led to it wrongly granting permission for the development. Mr X’s neighbour has since taken legal action and Mr X says he has suffered significant financial losses because of the Council’s errors.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
4. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• a decision to refuse planning permission
• conditions placed on planning permission
• a planning enforcement notice.

5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X is unhappy with how the Council dealt with his first application to extend his property. However, Mr X appealed to the Planning Inspector against the Council’s decision to refuse planning permission. The Council’s handling of the application is linked to the decision which has been appealed. The Ombudsman cannot investigate when someone has used their right to appeal to the Planning Inspector, even if the appeal did not provide a remedy for all the issues complained about.
8. Mr X has also complained his permitted development rights have been removed as a condition of the planning permission that was granted. However, I consider it would have been reasonable for Mr X to have used his right of appeal to the Planning Inspector if he was unhappy with the conditions imposed on his planning permission. The Ombudsman will not usually investigate complaints when an appeal right exists.
9. Mr X says the Council incorrectly granted his second planning application and he has incurred considerable costs as a result. His neighbour has taken legal action in relation to the development and Mr X says his home has lost value. Mr X says he has suffered additional financial losses as he has not been able to complete the extension and these problems would not have occurred had the Council properly dealt with the planning application.
10. Mr X believes the Council has been negligent and should compensate him. But the Ombudsman cannot decide if a council is negligent and does not have the power to award damages. Only the courts can do this. In circumstances such as these we would expect the complainant to seek a remedy through the courts and I see no good reason why Mr X cannot do this.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has used his right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. Mr X can seek a remedy in court if he believes the Council has been negligent.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman