Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council should not have granted planning permission for the complainant’s neighbour to build an extension. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, says the Council should not have granted planning permission for her neighbour to build an extension. Mrs X wants her neighbour to dismantle the extension.

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 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 Mrs X. I also considered the neighbour’s planning application, the report from the planning officer and photographs taken during the site inspection. Mrs X made comments on a draft of this decision which I considered.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mrs X’s neighbour applied for planning permission to build a single storey rear extension. On the application form she said there were no trees within felling distance. The photographs show trees, in Mrs X’s garden, adjacent to the site of the proposed extension. The Council did a site visit and granted permission.
5. Mrs X says the neighbour thinks the trees may fall and damage the extension. Mrs X reports the neighbour arranged for some of Mrs X’s trees to be felled without Mrs X’s consent. Mrs X reported this to the police.
6. Mrs X complained to the Council and said planning permission should not have been granted due to the proximity of the extension to her trees. She said she was not consulted about the application and would have objected.
7. In response the Council said it sent her a neighbour notification letter. It also explained there was no material planning reason to refuse the application. It said there are no trees on the neighbour’s land affected by the proposal and the extension would not have any impact on trees in Mrs X’s garden. The Council said it was a neighbour dispute rather than a planning issue.
8. Mrs X denies there was a site inspection. She has also referred to a document she found on the Council’s website which refers to the Council getting a report from a tree officer and says the distance to a proposed development should be the equivalent to the height of the nearest tree.
9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council assesses planning applications in terms of the law, adopted policies and material planning considerations. This can include issues such as loss of light or privacy, design, and impact on the environment. However, the presence of trees in another garden would not be a reason for the Council to have refused consent especially as the law says the Council must consider whether a development will harm a tree. In this case any harm that has happened has not been caused by the extension but by the actions of other people. The problems Mrs X has experienced flow from a neighbour dispute which she would need to address with her neighbour.
10. I have seen photographs which confirm there was a site visit and the officer was able to see the trees regardless of what the neighbour stated on the application form about there being no trees. The document Mrs X has referred to does not form part of the Council’s planning policy but offers advice which may be relevant depending on the type of planning application being considered. The context of the document is mainly for significant developments on large sites. This complaint is about an application for a small extension where the building does not have any impact on Mrs X or her trees.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman