Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a planning application as there is no evidence of fault by the Council causing injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council granted planning permission for a development of housing without properly considering his objections. He says the Council also failed to deal properly with his Freedom of Information requests and failed to tell him when the decision was reached.

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. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

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. A planning application for a large development of housing was submitted in September 2019. Mr X objected in November 2019 (and on later occasions).
7. The Planning Committee considered the planning application in March 2021 where they decided to approve the planning application subject to a legal agreement. Planning permission was granted in January 2022.
8. Mr X says the Council did not notify him of the decision to grant planning permission. There is no legal requirement for a Council to notify the public personally of planning application decisions (they are available online). The Ombudsman would not therefore pursue this part of the complaint.
9. Mr X says that the Council originally told him the planning application had been advertised in the local press which the Council later accepted was not the case. The Council accepts that a press notice had not been issued (in error). Nevertheless, this did not affect Mr X’s ability (and others) to object to the planning application and therefore I do not consider that any significant injustice was caused by this error.
10. Mr X says that the Council did not respond properly to his FOI requests. The Ombudsman would not investigate a complaint about FOI requests for the reason given in paragraph three above.
11. I note that the Planning Committee considered a written note (read aloud) from Mr X at the meeting in March 2021. I am satisfied that the Planning Officer report properly considered all objections and the Planning Committee had the benefit of Mr X’s personal objections to the planning application when the decision was reached. In the absence of any administrative fault, the Ombudsman would not question the merits of the decision reached.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman