Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning permission for a telephone mast as there is insufficient injustice to warrant investigation and a legal remedy has been sought.

The complaint

1. Mr X says that a planning application for upgrading a telephone mast has been improperly considered.

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 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 continue 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), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We have the power to start or end an investigation into a complaint about actions the law allows us to investigate. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been mentioned as part of the legal proceedings regarding a closely related matter. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X argues that a planning application determined in November 2022 was made improperly as the Council did not notify residents properly or take into account their views.
7. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
8. Whilst Mr X may be able to see the mast (which already exists) I am not persuaded that the sight of the upgraded mast is sufficient to warrant investigate given the paragraph above.
9. Other residents nearer the mast can make a complaint if they wish but they will also need to establish a significant injustice to warrant such investigation. Loss of a view is not a planning consideration and may not be sufficient injustice to warrant investigation.
10. I note that judicial review proceedings were commenced against the Council. As such this complaint is out of jurisdiction for the reason given in paragraph 3 above.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman