Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s pre-application planning advice. This is because the complaint is late and we cannot decide whether the advice was correct. If Miss X believes her proposal is acceptable she may wish to apply for planning permission and appeal against any refusal. The Planning Inspectorate is better placed to determine if the Council’s approach to the proposal is correct.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains about pre-application planning advice provided by the Council in 2021. She says the Council failed to contact her to discuss the proposal and that the advice failed to follow local and national planning policy and guidance. She says it took over a year to prepare a 20-page rebuttal statement to the advice and the Council failed to properly consider this.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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)
6. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• A decision to refuse planning permission
• Conditions placed on planning permission.

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. Any complaint about the way the Council considered Miss X’s pre-application advice request and the content of the advice it provided is late. This is because Miss X did not complain to us about it within 12 months.
9. However it is unlikely we would have investigated even if Miss X had raised the matter with us sooner. This is because the substantive issue concerns the content of the advice, which is a matter of professional judgement, and it is not for us to say it was wrong.
10. The Council has reviewed the advice in light of Miss X’s concerns but stands by the information it provided. I understand Miss X is not happy with this but pre-application advice is informal and non-binding. So if she does not accept what the Council has said she may wish to submit a formal planning application for the proposal. If the Council refuses the application she may then appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. The Planning Inspectorate is better placed to decide if the Council’s approach is correct; this is not our role.
11. Miss X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and the appropriate way for Miss X to challenge the Council’s pre-application advice would be to apply for planning permission and appeal against any decision to refuse it.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman