Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with planning applications for developments near the complainants’ home. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainants, whom I shall refer to as Mr and Mrs X, have complained about how the Council dealt with planning applications for two developments near their home. Mr and Mrs X say both developments have negatively impacted their property and the Council has been dismissive of their concerns. Mr and Mrs X say they have been caused considerable distress and suffered financial losses because of the Council’s actions.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

4. When a local authority receives a planning application it must look at the development plan and material planning considerations to decide if the proposal is acceptable. Material considerations relate to the use and development of the land in the public interest and includes matters such as the impact on neighbouring properties and the relevant planning policies. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material considerations in determining a planning application.
5. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body for planning decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
6. Mr and Mrs X have raised many concerns about how the Council dealt with a planning application and an application for a non-material amendment at a site opposite their home. However, I am satisfied the Council properly considered the applications, including the impact on the street scene and the character of the area, before granting permission for the development. Mr and Mrs X say the planning application description was misleading. But I consider it clear from the case officer’s report what the proposed development involved.
7. I have also considered Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with an application for another development near their home. They say the Council did not properly assess the impact the development would have on their property and did not consider the objections they raised.
8. I am again satisfied the Council properly assessed the acceptability of the development, including the impact on neighbouring properties, before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report referred to Mr and Mrs X’s objections and addressed their concerns. However, the officer decided the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties.
9. Mr and Mrs X disagree and says the case officer did not visit their home to properly assess the impact and ignored the restrictive covenants that applied to the site. But there is no requirement for councils to visit neighbouring properties to assess the acceptability of a development and any covenants that apply to a site are not a material planning consideration.
10. I understand Mr and Mrs X disagree with the decisions to grant planning permission for the developments. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgment to decide the applications were acceptable and the Ombudsman cannot question the decisions unless they were tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered the applications, it is unlikely I could find fault.
11. Mr and Mrs X have also complained about the Council’s complaint handling. 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 matters such as complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman