Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of past and current planning applications at a site in Ms X’s locale. This because past applications fall outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time and there is no evidence to suggest fault in the Council’s handling of more recent applications.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains she is frustrated by the Council’s poor processes and decision making in connection with development at a site in her locale. She says there has been a lack of public consultation with neighbours despite the development’s detrimental visual impact on her and the surrounding area which is classified as an AONB.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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 provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
5. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X complained to the Council about its handling of various planning applications made in relation to a site close to her home over a number of years. It responded to the concerns raised and explained there is no requirement to consult neighbours on prior approval applications. It also confirmed it had considered her objections in relation to an application for solar panels but that it had decided to grant conditional permission. It advised her to report any planning breaches to its Planning Enforcement Team.
9. The restriction highlighted at paragraph 3 applies to the part of Ms X’s complaint which concerns old planning applications. As we would reasonably have expected her to have made a complaint to us at the time, they fall outside our jurisdiction and will not be investigated.
10. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants disagree. We cannot question council decisions if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. There is no evidence to suggest fault affected the more recent planning decisions the Council has made.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because past planning applications fall outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time and there is no evidence to suggest fault in the Council’s handling of more recent applications.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman