Summary: Mr X complains about matters relating to the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for development at a site adjacent to his home. We will not investigate the complaint because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains that members on the Council’s Planning Committee overruled an officer recommendation to refuse permission for development at a site adjacent to his home which will impact negatively upon his amenity.

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 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.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Following the submission of a planning application for development at a site adjacent to Mr X’s home which will impact upon his amenity, Mr X submitted his objections to the application.
8. Despite an officer recommendation to refuse permission, members of the Committee determining the application decided to go against the officer recommendation and granted permission.
9. Mr X complained to the Council about a variety of matters which it responded to but it did not uphold the complaint having found that the Committee meeting had been conducted appropriately and fairly with all material considerations taken into account.
10. While I understand Mr X is unhappy with the decision taken by the Council, we are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. We cannot question a decision a council has made if it has followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. I have seen no evidence to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman