Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning matter. This is because the complaint is late and the injustice Mr X claims is not the result of any fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council lost his objection to his neighbour’s planning application and failed to notify him that it had granted planning permission. He says his neighbour’s builders are working long hours, causing noise disturbance, and have damaged his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X contacted the Council to discuss his concerns about his neighbour’s planning application and then submitted a written objection. The Council has no record of receiving Mr X’s written objection but Mr X says he has a receipt for it. He is unhappy as he believes the Council failed to consider his concerns.
6. This complaint is late. Although the Council did not inform Mr X it had granted permission for the proposal Mr X confirms he was informed before building work started that the Council had approved it. He says building work has now been ongoing for more than 12 months and his complaint therefore falls outside our time limit for investigation.
7. However, even if Mr X had raised his complaint with us within 12 months of finding out about the decision we would not investigate it. This is because the Council’s planning officer was aware of Mr X’s concerns and the officer’s report shows they considered the impact of the development on Mr X’s property in reaching their decision to grant planning permission. We could not therefore say the outcome would have been different, had the Council not misplaced Mr X’s objection.
8. Mr X claims injustice from the work carried out by his neighbour’s builder but this is primarily in terms of noise disturbance from the construction and damage to his property. The Council has explained to Mr X that work is expected and acceptable between the hours of 8am and 6pm from Monday to Friday but if the builders are working outside these hours he may report the matter and it will consider the matter further. Damage to Mr X’s property is unfortunately not a planning matter and the Council is not therefore under any duty to resolve Mr X’s concerns. His remedy for this issue lies in a claim against those responsible for the damage and Mr X may wish to seek legal advice on this point.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and there is no evidence to show the alleged fault has caused Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman