Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council is processing a planning application. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. Also, it is not possible to determine whether the complainant has suffered a significant personal injustice as the planning application has not yet been decided. And it is reasonable to expect the complainant to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office if he is unhappy with the Council’s response to a request made under the Freedom of Information Act.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mr X, says the Council failed to inform all relevant stakeholders about a planning application to change the use of a farmer’s field to a dog walking area.
2. He also complains about the Council’s response to a request for information made under the Freedom of Information Act.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complains the Council erected a site notice in a place where there is no pedestrian or vehicular access to publicise a planning application.
7. Planning authorities must publicise all planning applications. Depending on the nature of the development, publication may be by newspaper advertisement and / or site notice and / or neighbour notification (The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.) The notice will invite ‘representations’ for or against the application and explain how those representations may be made. The opportunity to make representations is not the same as being consulted. The authority must consider all material representations it receives but officers will not enter a dialogue with members of the public who have objected to a planning application.
8. The Council’s Statement of Community Involvement states for this application type it will erect a site notice or it will inform neighbours who share an adjoining boundary with the application site. The Council confirms it erected a site notice at the front of the site off the main road. There is no requirement to write to neighbours.
9. However, the Planning Officer had sent letters to the occupiers of five properties close to the site.
10. The purpose of publicising planning applications is to allow interested or affected parties to comment. As the Council has complied with the requirements for publicising the application and as Mr X has commented on the application, there is no evidence of fault of personal injustice.
11. I understand Mr X is not satisfied with how the Council has handled the application. However, as it has not decided whether to approve the application, it is not yet possible to say if Mr X has been caused significant injustice because of alleged fault with how the Council has dealt with the application. It may refuse planning permission.
12. Mr X also complains about how the Council dealt with his Freedom of Information (FOI) request. However, it is reasonable to expect him to complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) on this point. The ICO is the independent body set up to uphold information rights and it is suitable for them to deal with this matter.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because :
• we are unlikely to find fault in the way the Council publicised the application
• we do not consider that Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice; and
• it is reasonable for him to complain to the ICO about the Council’s response to his request for information.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman