Summary: We will not investigate how the Council responded to consultation on two planning applications. The complainant has not been caused injustice that warrants our involvement because the local planning authority refused both applications.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Ms B, complained about the response the Council provided to the local planning authority (LPA) about two related planning applications. In summary, Ms B considered highways issues associated with the proposed development would affect her land.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’.
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms B and on the LPA’s website. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council is the highways authority for the area. The LPA sought its views on highways matters relating to the planning applications. Although Ms B and the Council disagreed about the impact on her land, the LPA has refused both applications since she complained to us.

Back to top

Final decision

We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because the LPA did not grant planning permission for the development that concerns her. I do not consider the Council’s actions can have caused her significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman