Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve an application for consent under its Householder Extension Local Development Order Scheme. We have not seen evidence of fault to justify an investigation. Nor can we achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mr X complains the Council adopted a Householder Extension Local Development Order (LDO) scheme. He says the scheme relies on the applicants adhering to the rules and no checks are made.
2. Mr X is particularly concerned about the Council’s consent for his neighbour’s LDO application for a two-storey rear extension. This followed its refusal of a full planning application for a similar proposal.
3. He believes the application was contentious and wants consent withdrawn. He also wants the Council to give neighbours affected by unwanted development to have a means to appeal.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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, and
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and information available on the Council’s website.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council introduced a Householder Extension Local Development Order (LDO) in 2017. The Council’s explanation for the LDO says it allows certain extensions to be built without planning permission. The LDO does not remove any nationally set ‘permitted development ‘rights which allow certain extensions to a property without needing planning permission. However, it broadens the range of extensions homeowners can carry out without needing to apply for full planning permission. These include:
• erection of single storey rear and side extensions
• erection of a two-storey extension; and
• first floor side and rear extensions.
8. There are a series of checks applicants must make and they must follow detailed design guidance in the LDO design guide. The Council does not publicly advertise LDO applications. But it advises applicants to discuss the proposals with their neighbours.
9. Mr X says the Council consulted multiple neighbours about the similar full planning application for the same property which was previously refused. However, for the LDO application, the applicant only posted notes to neighbours on either side of the property.
10. The Council’s guidance on applying for LDO consent says applicants are advised to discuss the proposal with their neighbours. The application form requires applicants to confirm they have notified adjoining neighbours. In this case Mr X confirms the applicant posted notes through the doors of the adjoining properties.
11. Under the LDO criteria, the Council is not required to consider whether proposals are contentious, it is only required to confirm such applications meet the requirements of the LDO. It cannot consider the development against planning policies.
12. The Ombudsman is not an appeal service. We cannot consider the merits of Council decisions made without fault. Nor can we require the Council to withdraw LDO consent. Also, there is no third party right of appeal provided in law against planning or LDO consents.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the LDO application. Also, we cannot achieve the outcomes he is seeking because of this complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman