Thanet District Council (21 012 245)

Category : Planning > Planning applications

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 18 Jan 2022

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the removal of a pedestrian access following a Council grant of planning permission nearly 20 years ago. This is because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says the Council was at fault in not properly considering matters relating to the removal of a pedestrian access when it granted planning permission for a development in 2003.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. In 2003 planning permission was granted for a housing development. Last year, having recently moved into his property, Mr X complained to the Council about the removal of a pedestrian access. The Council explained to him that the access had not been secured by the 2003 permission and, as the land in question had been in separate ownership, it could not have been.
  2. The Council says no further action could have been taken in 2003 to secure the access and that changes in the ownership of land which is not under its control has led to the loss of the access. An investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to add the Council’s own investigation or lead to a different outcome.
  3. Mr X’s current concerns about road and pedestrian safety can be raised with the County Council.
  4. We will generally not investigate complaints about a council’s handling of a complaint when we are not investigating the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings