Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with planning applications. This is because we are unlikely to find fault. The complainant also had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

The complaint

1. Miss X has complained about the Council’s decision to grant her neighbour’s planning applications. Miss X says the extensions will have a significant impact on her property.
2. Miss X has also complained about how the Council dealt with her planning application. She says she was treated unfairly by the Council, and it did not place the same restrictions on her neighbour’s applications that it applied to her extension.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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), as amended)
5. 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.

6. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Miss X says the Council restricted the size of the extension she could build, but it has recently given her neighbours permission to build much larger extensions. However, it has been many years since the Council granted Miss X planning permission to extend her home and planning laws and policies have changed since Miss X applied for planning permission. If Miss X did not agree with the Council’s advice regarding the size of her extension, she could have applied for a larger development and appealed to the Planning Inspector if the Council then refused planning permission. I consider it would have been reasonable for Miss X to have used this right of 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.
9. Miss X says her neighbour’s extensions will have a significant impact on her home. However, I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the applications before granting planning permission for the developments. The case officer’s reports referred to Miss X’s objections and addressed her concerns. But the case officer decided the proposals would not have an unacceptable impact on Miss X’s property.
10. I understand Miss X may disagree. But the case officer was entitled to use their professional judgment to decide the applications were acceptable and the Ombudsman cannot question these decisions unless they were tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered the applications, it is unlikely I could find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council. Miss X also could have appealed to the Planning Inspector.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman