Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about costs incurred by the complainant as a result of delay in determining his planning applications. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner, to have used his right of appeal to the Planning Inspector, and to pursue his compensation claim in court.

The complaint

1. Mr X says he has incurred additional build and Council Tax costs (over £120,000) as a result of cumulative delays in determining his planning applications.
2. Mr X thinks the Council should pay compensation in respect of these extra costs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 also says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could have appealed to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to have appealed. (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 can consider appeals about delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding a planning application.
7. Lastly, the law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by the Mr X and the Council.
9. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. The time restriction detailed in paragraph 4 above would apply to any of the applications where Mr X has been aware of the determination delay for more than 12 months. I see no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider these late parts of the complaint now.
11. Furthermore, it was open to Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspector against non‑determination when his applications remained undetermined by the 8-week target date. I consider it reasonable to expect him to have used the remedy expressly put in place by Parliament to address such situations.
12. Finally, I understand the Council’s legal team is in the process of responding to Mr X’s compensation claim. We cannot determine compensation claims, as these are ultimately matters that only a court can decide. And, unlike the Ombudsman, the court has the power to order the Council to pay compensation. So, if Mr X remains dissatisfied with the Council’s eventual decision on his claim, then it seems reasonable to expect him to pursue the matter further in court.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to:
• have contacted us sooner,
• have used his right of appeal to the Planning Inspector, and,
• pursue his compensation claim in court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman