Summary: Mr X complains about procedural faults by the Council in its handling of a planning application for a development in his locale. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council and Mr X’s injustice is insufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says there were procedural faults with the way the Council dealt with a planning application for a development in his locale, particularly with regard to its consideration of matters relating to the curtilage of the development site. He says it did not adequately explain its decision to grant permission having previously refused a similar earlier application and that the development allowed is an eyesore.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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)
3. 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 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, 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

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, including the Council’s responses to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Following the refusal of an earlier application, the Council considered a revised application for a development in Mr X’s locale. The revised application sought to address the reasons for refusal of the earlier application.
8. Mr X submitted his comments on the revised application which were read out at the planning committee meeting where members decided to approve the application, having accepted the revised proposal overcame the previous reason for refusal and that it caused limited impact to the landscape of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty in which the development site is set.
9. Unhappy with the decision and believing there had been procedural flaws in its consideration of the application, Mr X complained to the Council. It addressed numerous issues he raised, including those relating to the site curtilage. However, it did not uphold his complaint and satisfied itself the application had been considered in detail and in line with procedure.
10. While I understand Mr X does not agree with the decision taken, its merits are not open to review by the Ombudsman. We are not an appeal body and it is not our role to question decisions taken by councils if the right steps have been followed and the relevant evidence and information considered.
11. I have seen no evidence to suggest fault affected the decision or that Mr X’s injustice is sufficient to warrant an investigation.
12. In responding to my draft decision Mr X says while he does view the development as an eyesore, he accepts the impact will be diminished once the required landscaping and planting scheme is implemented. However, he says that his sense of injustice is strongly felt and persistent because the Council made a decision when there were procedural irregularities. While his comments are noted, we do not investigate every complaint we receive, and I do not consider he has been caused any personal injustice sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council and Mr X’s injustice is insufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman