Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a development near Mr X’s home. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has granted planning permission for a new development near his home. Mr X says the Council has not complied with its own policies and allowed comments to be made on the application beyond the deadline given in public notices.
2. Mr X says he has been caused significant time and trouble pursuing his complaint with the Council and he and the local community have been caused distress by the Council’s handling of the application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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))
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant. I have also considered information about the application on the Council’s website.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about fault causing injustice. Therefore, our decision on this complaint is focussed on parts of the application and Council decision making process that would potentially cause an injustice to Mr X or raise issues of wider public interest.
8. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision to grant planning application. The Council’s case officer report which was considered by the planning committee addresses issues relating to highways, local infrastructure, and the impact of the development on surrounding properties. Mr X may disagree with the Council’s views on these issues but there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.
9. Mr X is concerned about the way the Council “scored” the design of the development as part of an internal design review. This may form part of the Council’s decision-making process but it is only part of wider consideration the Council must give to the application. The Council’s case officer report considers the impact of the development on surrounding area in line with local and national policies, taking account of comments made by consultees and local people. Therefore, there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission.
10. Mr X is also concerned that the Council allowed comments to be made on the application after the deadline for comments had passed. It is good administrative practice for the Council to provide a deadline for comments to be provided to allow it time to consider what has been said. However, the Council is also entitled to consider comments received after the deadline has passed. It may be that any further comments raise important issues the Council has not considered. This may prevent it from making a decision which might be successfully challenged at appeal or which might result in finding of fault by the Ombudsman. Therefore, there is no evidence of fault in the Council allowing comments on the application after the deadline had passed.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman