Summary: We will not investigate this complaint as we have not seen evidence of fault in the Council’s consultation on a planning application. Nor do we consider the complainant has suffered any injustice as she has submitted her objections to the application for the Council’s consideration. Further investigation is unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action while the retrospective application is pending.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mrs X, complains the Council:
• Failed to notify residents of a planning application to develop an open field; and
• Failed to issue a stop notice to prevent unauthorised development on the site

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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X says the Council failed to notify residents about the retrospective application it received to build on a previously undeveloped field.
6. Planning authorities must publicise all planning applications. Depending on the nature of the development, publication may be by newspaper advertisement and/or site notice and/or neighbour notification (The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.) The notice will invite ‘representations’ for or against the application and explain how those representations may be made. The opportunity to make representations is not the same as being consulted. The authority must consider all material representations it receives but officers will not enter a dialogue with members of the public who have objected to a planning application.
7. In this case the Council says it notifies people who share a boundary with application sites. In any event, Mrs X is aware of the planning application and has submitted objections, as have many others. Therefore, I do not consider that she suffered any injustice because the Council did not tell her about the application.
8. The Council cannot refuse to accept a valid application. It must determine the application it receives according to national and local planning policy. The Council has not yet determined the application. I have seen no fault in the Council’s actions in accepting the valid application. If, once the decision has been made, Mrs X believes there are faults in the way the application was processed it is open for her to make a new complaint to the Council.
9. Mrs X also complains the Council has failed to issue a stop notice or take any enforcement action against the unauthorised development that has taken place on the site.
10. Planning enforcement is discretionary and formal action should happen only when it would be a proportionate response to the breach. When deciding whether to enforce, councils should consider the likely impact of harm to the public and whether they might grant approval if they were to receive an application for the development or use. Government guidance encourages councils to resolve issues through negotiation and dialogue with developers.
11. In this case the Council has received a retrospective application for development that has already taken place. I have seen no evidence of fault in the Council not taking enforcement action while a retrospective application is pending.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. We have not seen evidence of fault in the Council’s consultation on the planning application. Nor do we consider that Mrs X has suffered any injustice as she has submitted her objections to the application for the Council’s considerations.
13. Further investigation is unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action while the retrospective application is pending.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman