Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning permission as there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X says that the Council failed to properly consider his amenity when granting planning permission for a neighbour’s extension.

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 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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X’s neighbour submitted a planning application for a two storey extension to the Council which was granted in June 2022.
6. Mr X objected to the planning application on several grounds including loss of privacy, daylight and the overbearing nature of the extension.
7. The Planning Officer referred to these, and other objections but concluded that that, as the window on the side elevation (on Mr X’s side) was not for a habitable room, there would be no significant amenity concerns for Mr X. The Planning Officer noted that the existing fence would also reduce the effect upon Mr X and the rear extension would not breach the 45 degree rule. The Planning Officer was also satisfied with the effect upon wildlife and highways.
8. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether you disagree with the decision the organisation made.
9. I have considered the steps the organisation took to consider the issue, and the information it took account of when deciding to grant planning permission. There is no fault in how it took the decision and I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman