Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s neighbour’s planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence to fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, says the planning officer did not visit to assess her neighbour’s planning application from her property and they played down the size of the proposed extension which will impact greatly on her property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. We 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)
3. 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained to the Council about its handling of her neighbour’s planning application to build an extension at their property.
7. The Council accepted it had not responded to all the points Ms X had raised as part of her complaint at Stage 1 of its complaints procedure but it did so at Stage 2. It confirmed a visit to the application site had taken place and that officers had been advised that where interested parties had been told to expect a site visit and this was then deemed to be unnecessary the parties concerned should be told.
8. It acknowledged Ms X had had difficulties in submitting her comments online but noted she had been able to do so and that these had been considered in making the decision. It explained that officers use their professional judgement in assessing applications and that disagreement with decisions taken on them fall outside the scope of the complaints procedure.
9. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants do not agree. We cannot question the decisions councils make if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. While Ms X may not agree with the Council’s decision on the application, there is no evidence to suggest fault affected it.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence to fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman