Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her neighbour’s planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault affecting its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about the Council’s handling of her neighbour’s application for planning permission. She says the Council failed to properly consider the impact of the proposal on her property and failed to address inaccuracies in the plans submitted by her neighbour. She says the development will impact on light to her property, affect her outlook and reduce the value of the 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. 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 Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. While I appreciate Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for her neighbour’s proposal I have seen no evidence of fault affecting the decision. We cannot therefore criticise it.
7. The planning officer consider relevant objections in recommending the proposal for approval and Ms X’s comments on the inaccuracies in her neighbour’s plans do not materially affect the outcome. While Ms X believes the Council should have visited her property there is no requirement for this. The planning officer’s report shows the reasons they did not consider the impact on light or outlook as significant enough to refuse the application and any impact on the value of Ms X’s property is not material so cannot be used as grounds to refuse the application.
8. Ultimately we are not an appeal body and have no powers to overturn the Council’s decision or to consider the matter afresh. The Council is the body empowered to decide the merits of the application and I see no basis for us to question its decision in this case.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council affecting its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman