Summary: Mr and Ms X complain about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a neighbour’s extension. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and the matter is out of time.

The complaint

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

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. The complainant provided comments on a draft of my decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The complainants say that the Council did not properly consider a neighbour’s planning application for a garage at the back of the property.
8. Although they were unhappy about assistance by Planning Officers in making an objection, I note that they were able to do so via their solicitor. The Planning Officer refers to their objection in the report but concluded that the height of the garage was not so great as to warrant refusal on the grounds of loss of amenity to the complainants.
9. The Council advised the complainants that any trespass or boundary disputes are private matters. Further, any building work carried out prior to planning permission is not illegal and are not a ground for enforcement action as the planning permission was granted in any event.
10. The Planning Officer had the benefit of the objections made by the complainants when the decision was made.
11. I am, further, satisfied that the Planning Officer had before them detailed, scaled, plans which enabled them to make a proper assessment of the effect the garage would have on neighbouring amenity.
12. I consider that the planning permission was determined without administrative fault.
13. The planning permission was granted in May 2020. I have seen no evidence that a complaint could not have been made to this office within 12 months and so the matter is also out of time and therefore out of jurisdiction.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault and the matter is out of time.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman