Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning matter. The complaint appears late and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. The matter also does not cause Mrs X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about development approved by the Council in 2019. She also complains the development has not been completed properly. She says the development affects the character of the conservation area in which she lives and that it has devalued her property and others in the area.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
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 Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council granted various applications for development at a site near Mrs X’s property between 2017 and 2019. The Council did not consult Mrs X about several of the applications directly but she was clearly aware of an application relating to the site in 2019 and should therefore have been aware of the development approved by that time. Any complaint about the development therefore appears late.
7. However, regardless of the lateness of the complaint there is no clear evidence of fault by the Council and we do not consider its actions have caused Mrs X significant injustice.
8. While the new development may not be to Mrs X’s taste the Council has considered its impact and decided it is acceptable. Mrs X suggests she would have objected to the applications but her points of concern are broadly the same as those raised by other local residents so we could not say her comments would have altered the outcome.
9. Mrs X clearly disagrees with the Council’s decisions and believes the development is not appropriate but the Council must consider each application on its merits and the law does not allow us to question its professional judgement that the development is acceptable.
10. Mrs X says the Council was wrong to allow parts of the development as they are not ‘permitted’, but permitted development is development which may be carried out without the need for planning permission under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). If development is not permitted under the 2015 Order this simply means it requires planning permission; not that the Council cannot approve it. Any aspects of the development which are permitted by the 2015 Order are not subject to approval by the Council and it cannot therefore stop them.
11. Mrs X also raises concerns that the development has not been completed in accordance with the approved plans but the Council confirms it has. I appreciate Mrs X’s concerns on this point but the Council has explained its view and it is not for us to question it. Her primary concerns relate to the shade of paint used by the developer and the difference between that which she expected and what has actually been used is not significant enough to warrant investigation in any event.
12. Mrs X says the development has created a wind-tunnel effect which has caused damage to her property but this is not a planning issue and we could not hold the Council responsible for this damage.
13. She is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint but it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint appears late and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or of significant injustice to Mrs X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman