Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with planning applications and a possible breach of planning control. This is because parts of the complaint are late. It is unlikely we will find fault, and the complainants have not been caused significant injustice, in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

The complaint

1. The complainants, whom I shall refer to as Mr and Mrs X, have complained about how the Council dealt with their neighbour’s planning applications. They say they were not notified about changes to the plans and the development will overlook their property and have a significant impact on their privacy.
2. Mr and Mrs X are also unhappy with how the Council dealt with their concerns about a possible breach of planning control.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr and Mrs X have complained about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for their neighbour’s extension. However, the original planning application for the development was granted several years ago. Complaints about the planning decision are therefore late and I see no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate. Mr and Mrs X were aware of the application and objected to the proposal at the time and could have complained to the Ombudsman sooner.
9. Since the Council granted planning permission for the extension, Mr and Mrs X’s neighbour have applied on many occasions to amend the approved plans. Mr and Mrs X say they were not notified about these applications and therefore were not able to object. However, even if I could say the planning applications were not properly publicised, I could not say Mr and Mrs X have been caused significant injustice as a result.
10. I am satisfied the Council properly considered the changes to the plans before approving the applications. The case officer’s reports referred to the impact on neighbouring properties before deciding the proposals were acceptable. I understand Mr and Mrs X may disagree. But the case officer was entitled to use their professional judgment in this regard. As the Council properly considered the applications, it is likely the planning decisions would be the same had Mr and Mrs X known about and objected to the amended plans.
11. I have also considered Mr and Mrs X’s concerns about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action. They say the development is not being built in line with the approved plans and the windows are not non opening and obscurely glazed as they should be.
12. Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission or not complied with planning conditions. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action.
13. In this case, I am satisfied the Council properly considered Mr and Mrs X’s concerns before deciding the development was largely being carried out in line with the approved plans. This was a decision the Council was entitled to make.
14. I understand Mr and Mrs X say the windows for the development should be obscurely glazed. One of the earlier planning applications did include a planning condition in this regard. But the condition did not apply to the windows facing towards Mr and Mrs X's home. The approved plans have also since been amended and the permission being implemented did not include this condition.
15. Mr and Mrs X have also complained about how the Council dealt with their complaint. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor issues such as complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because parts of the complaint are late. Mr and Mrs X have not been caused significant injustice by any alleged failures to notify them about their neighbour’s planning applications. We are

unlikely to find fault in relation to the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman