Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with its local and a neighbour plan or planning applications in the area where Mr X lives. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to define the size of potential housing development sites within a neighbourhood plan. Mr X says this has had a detrimental impact on the Council’s consideration of three planning applications in the area.
2. Mr X says the Council’s actions will have a negative impact on the character of the area and surrounding countryside.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and information about the neighbourhood plan and planning applications on the Council’s website.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council’s neighbourhood plan for the area in question says it will allow development of housing on “small” and “windfall” sites. The plan says “windfall” sites “are considered to be developments of 4 units or less on small sites” and exact locations are not set out in the plan. The “small” sites are defined locations within the neighbourhood plan and the Council’s local plan. The Council local plan says:

“Whether sites are ‘small’ or not will be assessed against how much they expand [the settlement] to which they are adjacent, and the extent to which they are compatible with the existing structure of the landscape”.

8. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council has drawn up the neighbourhood and local plan in relation to the area complained of. Whilst Mr X may wish the Council to put an exact number on the number of houses which may be permitted the Council has decided to give itself some flexibility. However it has set out criteria against which the size of the sites will be assessed. Mr X may disagree with the Council’s decision but in the absence any evidence of fault in the way it was reached we cannot criticise it.
9. The Council has considered the neighbourhood plan in two recent planning applications for housing developments even though it had not been formally adopted at the time. The Council’s officer reports for both applications said the Council had given “significant weight” to the plan in reaching its decision to grant planning permission. Therefore, there is no evidence of fault in the way the applications were considered.
10. An earlier housing application was considered the neighbourhood plan before it had been subjected to a formal public consultation. The Council’s officer report still demonstrates that the Council considered the emerging neighbourhood plan as well as parts of the local plan which specifically refer to housing development in the area. Therefore, there is no evidence fault in the way the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission for this application.
11. As there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council has dealt with the neighbourhood plan, local plan and planning applications we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman