Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a neighbour’s extension. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a neighbour’s extension.

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.

(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.
5. The complainant provided comments on a draft of the decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X’s neighbour applied to the Council for a prior planning approval for an extension. The Council says that this means that the extension would normally be Permitted Development ie not need planning permission. However, the planning application could be refused on certain grounds, such as loss of amenity to a neighbour.
7. Mr X objected to the planning application on the grounds that his property would be overlooked and there would be a loss of privacy.
8. The Planning Officer report states that the extension would overlook Mr X’s garden and house but, from the plans and site visit, the effect was not considered so great as to warrant refusal. Mr X argues that the Planning Officer should have visited his property but the Council says a Planning Officer did visit the site to make an assessment.
9. Whilst I appreciate that Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s decision, I am satisfied that the Council properly considered the objections made. Their decision included a site visit so I cannot conclude that the Planning Officer was unaware of the impact the extension would have.
10. In the absence of administrative fault, the Ombudsman would not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman