Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice as a result of the alleged 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 application. Mr X says the Council failed to notify residents about the proposal and he lost the opportunity to comment on the application.

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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(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 Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. 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.
5. Councils are required to give publicity to planning applications. The publicity required depends on the nature of the development. However, in all cases the application must be published on the Council’s website. The Council’s Statement for Community Involvement says it will also erect a site notice and write to the occupiers of the adjoining properties.
6. The Council says it did send a letter to Mr X’s property. I understand Mr X disputes this and says he, and other neighbours, did not receive a letter from the Council. He also says the Council did not put up a site notice. However, even if it could be shown the Council did not notify Mr X of the application as it should have, I cannot say he has been caused any significant injustice as a result.
7. The case officer’s report addressed the acceptability of the development, including the impact on neighbouring amenity. The report said the development would not cause significant harm to privacy or loss of light to the neighbouring properties. The report also said the proposal was not expected to cause noise disturbance. As the Council properly considered the application it is likely the decision to grant planning permission would be the same had Mr X had the opportunity to comment on the proposal.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not been caused significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman