Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with the complainant’s application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for Existing Use or Development. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. The Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to deal with the complainant’s concerns about how the Council dealt with his request for information.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained the Council is taking too long to determine his application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for Existing Use or Development (CLEUD). He has also complained about how the Council has dealt with his request for information.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b))
4. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• Delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• A decision to refuse planning permission
• Conditions placed on planning permission
• A planning enforcement notice.

5. 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 another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X could have appealed to the Planning Inspector if he was unhappy with how long it was taking the Council to determine his application. I consider it would have been reasonable for Mr X to have used his right to appeal. The Ombudsman will not usually investigate when someone had a right to appeal to the Planning Inspector, even if the appeal would not have addressed all the issues complained about.
8. Mr X has also complained about how the Council has dealt with his request for information. However, Mr X can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) if he is concerned about how the Council dealt with his request for information. The ICO is the independent body set up to uphold information rights and is best placed to deal with these concerns.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. Mr X’s concerns about his request for information are best dealt with by the ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman