Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a development next to Mr X’s home. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision or dealt with the application.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has granted planning permission for a development next to his home which will affect his privacy and the value of his home. Mr X says the Council also allowed someone to make defamatory comments about him through its planning system.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))
3. 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. This includes information about the development on the Council’s website.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council produced an officer report which considered the impact of the development on the surrounding area. The report also considers Mr X’s comments on the development as well as the comments of others.
7. The officer report shows the Council has taken account of material planning considerations relating to the development. This includes the Council’s local policies and the impact of the development on Mr X’s property. Therefore there is no evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission.
8. Mr X and other local people are concerned about potential future uses of the development. The Council has imposed a planning condition restricting the future use of the property without planning permission. Therefore there is no evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision.
9. Someone left remarks about Mr X on the Council’s website when commenting on the planning application for the development. The Council removed the comments once Mr X complained. Mr X says the Council should not have allowed the comments to go on its website in the first instance. The Council said there is no evidence the comments were defamatory, and it has a duty to publish comments it receives. I have considered the comments made and there is no evidence of fault in the Council publishing these but removing them after Mr X’s complaint.
10. Mr X’s solicitor sent the Council a copy of another council’s guidance on publishing comments on planning applications. This is not statutory guidance and the Council is not bound to follow this.
11. As there is no evidence of fault in how the Council has dealt with this matter 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