Leicester City Council (21 014 917)
Category : Planning > Planning applications
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 04 Feb 2022
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a failure to tell the complainant about a planning application. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council publicised the application.
The complaint
- The complainant, I shall call Mr J says the Council failed to tell him about an application to erect a 20-metre high, 5G mast on a road near his home.
- He says the mast ‘looms’ over his home and he wants it removed.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr J.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Planning authorities must publicise all planning applications. Depending on the nature of the development, publication may be by newspaper advertisement and / or site notice and / or neighbour notification (The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.) The notice will invite ‘representations’ for or against the application and explain how those representations may be made.
- The Council’s Statement of Community Involvement says it will place a site notice near application sites and write to the occupiers or owners of property which adjoin those sites.
- Although the mast is visible from Mr J’s home, it is located in the central reservation of the next road. The Council says it placed a site notice close to the application site.
- I understand Mr J believes there was a moral duty to write to him about the application. But his property does not adjoin the site. It is clear the Council met its statutory obligations for publicising the application. I cannot criticise the Council’s actions as there is no evidence of fault in the statutory process.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr J’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council publicised the planning application.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman