Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a development next to the complainant’s home. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. Nor would further investigation lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mrs X, complains about the decision to approve planning permission for a 2-storey house next to her home. She says she has lost her privacy and her home has lost value.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. We cannot question whether an organisation’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 Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In 2019, the Council granted planning permission to demolish a house, which I shall call property A, and to build nine new homes. The plans show five houses and four bungalows.
7. Mrs X bought property A. She says she was told by the developer that they would build bungalows on the next-door site.
8. Mrs X moved into property A in February 2020.
9. Towards the end of February 2021, the Council received a new planning application to build seven houses and two bungalows
10. The Councils records show it sent neighbour notifications and erected a site notice. Mrs X did not object to the application.
11. The Planning Officer prepared a report on the scheme. This includes details of local and national planning policies. It includes confirmation that property A had been sold to a new owner (Mrs X) and will not be demolished. The Planning Officer considered property A will keep a good amount of private space to the front. They considered property A will not suffer from overlooking or a detrimental impact on amenity.
12. The Council granted planning permission.
13. I understand Mrs X relied on the developer’s word that it would only build bungalows. However, I will not investigate this complaint. It is the Council’s role as Local Planning Authority to consider:
• local and national planning polices
• comments from statutory consultees; and
• objections/representations from people affected by the decision as local planning authority

It must then decide whether a development is acceptable.

14. The evidence strongly suggests that this is what has happened in this case and therefore we would be unlikely to find fault if we investigated.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning application. Nor would an investigation lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman