Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s description of a planning application on its planning database. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There are insufficient reasons to exercise discretion to consider this late complaint now, and the alleged fault did not cause the complainants a significant injustice with regard to the planning outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainants, whom I refer to as Mr and Mrs X, say the summary details for their neighbour’s planning application are incorrect on the Council’s planning database. This is because it says only one property is associated with the planning application, when the structure is actually connected to Mr and Mrs X’s property too.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman can investigate 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 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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

3. And we cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, which included the Council’s Stage 2 and 3 complaint responses.
5. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The time restriction detailed in paragraph 3 above applies to the complaint. This is because the planning application was determined in late-August 2020, yet Mr and Mrs X did not contact the Ombudsman until late-October 2022. I appreciate the Council delayed in providing its Stage 2 complaint response between mid-March and early-September 2021. But I am also mindful that there was a 4-month gap between the Stage 2 response and Mr and Mrs X’s request to escalate the complaint to Stage 3, and a further 8-month period between the Stage 3 response and the complaint then being brought to the Ombudsman. On balance, I am not persuaded there are good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate this late complaint now.
7. But even if this time restriction did not apply, I see no evidence that the alleged fault in the description affected Mr and Mrs X’s ability to object to the application, or the Council’s assessment of the planning merits of the development. I therefore do not consider the alleged fault has caused Mr and Mrs X an injustice, because it did not affect the planning outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because it is late and there are insufficient reasons to exercise discretion on the time restriction. There is also no evidence to suggest the alleged fault affected the way the Council determined the planning application, so it has not caused them a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman