Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application close to the complainants home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault leading to an injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains about how the Council dealt with a retrospective planning application for a neighbour to change the use of land adjacent to their home to private use. He says the Council did not include his objections in its committee report and provided the committee with a last minute update which he did not have time to properly consider.

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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. When assessing planning complaints, we need evidence to show there was fault in the process and that without that fault the outcome of the planning application would likely to have been different. We also need evidence to show the complainant was caused a significant injustice by the Council’s actions.
6. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Case Officer’s report did not include his objection. This is because I am not satisfied that this caused Mr X an injustice. Whilst it is true that his objections were not included in the report, they were subsequently detailed in an update to the committee, therefore he did not miss out on the opportunity to raise his objections with those deciding the application.
7. I will also not investigate Mr X’s complain that he was not given enough time to see the Council’s response to his objections in the case officers update. This is because further investigation of this point is unlikely to lead to a finding of fault or demonstrate the outcome of the planning decision would have been different. The objections Mr X made related to his view that the land adjacent to the applicants was a public space for the enjoyment of the public. I am satisfied that this point was broadly similar to those made in objections made by other neighbours and that the Council’s position on this point had already been explained within the case officers report.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault leading to an injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman