Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a new development near Mr X’s home. This is because he has not been caused an injustice and there is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered the impact of the development on local wildlife.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to properly consider a planning application for a new development near his home. Mr X says the Council has allowed trees to be removed from the site and that the new development will overshadow his property and have a negative impact on any solar panels he installs in the future.

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 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))
3. 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and information about the planning application on the Council’s website.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X does not currently have solar panels on his property. Therefore we cannot show that he has been caused an injustice as a result any overshadowing from the development.
7. Furthermore, the development retains a number of tall trees on the site which would already cause overshadowing to Mr X’s house and garden. Therefore, the development itself would not significantly worsen the overshadowing Mr X already experiences and so we will not investigate this complaint
8. Mr X raises other issues in his complaint about the way the Council has handled the planning application. This includes removal of other trees on the site and speculative impact of the development on local wildlife including bats and badgers. There is no evidence of badgers on the site and the Council has required the developer to provide bird and bat boxes on site as part of a condition of the planning permission. Therefore, there is no evidence of fault by the Council so we will not investigate these aspects of Mr X’s complaint.
9. Mr X has also complained about energy performance and other aspects of the development. However these do not cause him any injustice or raise issues of significant wider public interest.
10. Mr X is unhappy the Council took too long to respond to his complaint. We will not investigate how a Council responded to a complaint unless we are also investigating the matters complained of. Therefore we will not investigate the Council’s handling of Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not been caused an injustice and there is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered the impact of the development on local wildlife.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman