Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application next door to the complainant’s house. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice because of any fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council failed to consider evidence he provided on his neighbour’s planning application. Mr X says this meant the Council did not properly consider his application and he will be affected when the extension is built.

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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (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 Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X says he sent the Council objections to a planning application for an extension to his neighbour’s house. Mr X says he sent the Council several photographs showing a before and after image of what the extension would look like and how this would affect him.
7. Mr X says the Council told him they did not receive the photographs until after it had granted planning permission. He says this means the Council has not properly considered his objections about the impact on his house.
8. The plans submitted with the planning application would allow the Council to reach a view of the impact of the extension on Mr X’s property without needing to see Mr X’s photographs. The Council produced an officer report which considered the impact of the extension on Mr X’s house as well as the Council’s policies. Whilst Mr X may disagree with some of the reasons for the Council’s decision, there is no evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision. Therefore, it is likely the Council would have reached the same decision even if it had sight of Mr X’s photographs and so he has not been caused an injustice as a result of any fault by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application next door to the complainant’s house. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice as a result of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman