Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning applications for a property next to the complainant. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner, and there is not enough evidence that fault has affected the planning outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council failed to properly publicise planning applications for works to a neighbouring property, and has ignored his objections.

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. We 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. So, 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

4. We can consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. But 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

6. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X, including the Council’s complaint responses.
• information about the planning applications and associated Planning Committee meetings, available on the Council’s website.
• The Council’s Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), which sets out how the Council will publicise planning applications.
• The Council’s Constitution, which sets out how decisions will be made on applications where the applicant is a councillor and/or sits on the planning committee.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The time restriction detailed in paragraph 5 above appears to apply to Mr X’s complaint. This is because the applications being complained about were determined more than 2 years ago, and I note the Council says it provided a detailed response to Mr X’s concerns in late-2021. Yet Mr X did not contact the Ombudsman until August 2023. I see no reasons why Mr X was prevented from contacting us sooner if he was unhappy about the Council granting planning permission for the works, so we will not start an investigation now.
8. And even if this time restriction did not apply, the Ombudsman does not provide a right of appeal against the Council’s planning application decisions. Rather, our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made, and to consider if any fault in that process is likely to have affected the outcome.
9. I find there is not enough evidence that fault has affected the planning outcome here, so the Ombudsman would not start an investigation for this reason too. In reaching this view, I am mindful that:
• the Council publicised each application in accordance with statutory requirements/its SCI, and we cannot hold the Council responsible for any errors by Royal Mail in delivering neighbour notification letters.
• there is no requirement for the Council to visit neighbouring properties during the determination of a planning application.
• Mr X was able to comment on two of the applications, and his objections are included in the reports/updates to the Planning Committee.
• the applications were considered in accordance with the procedures for determining applications submitted by councillors.
• The reports/updates to the Planning Committee consider the material planning considerations. Members of the Committee were entitled to reach their own view on whether the proposals were acceptable in planning terms, even if this goes against the recommendation of officers.
10. We also would not be able to achieve the main outcome Mr X is seeking, as we cannot direct the Council to stop the neighbour carrying out the development.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to have contacted us sooner, and there is not enough evidence that fault has affected the planning decisions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman