Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling and consideration of a planning application for building works next to the complainants’ property. There is not enough evidence of any fault in the decision-making process affecting the outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complain about the Council’s handling and consideration of a planning application for building works at a neighbouring property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start 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.

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

3. We can 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered:
• information provided by Mr and Mrs X.
• information about the planning application on the Council’s website.
• the recording of the Planning Committee meeting.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I appreciate Mr and Mrs X are very unhappy that the Council granted planning permission for the building works at the neighbouring property.
6. But the Ombudsman does not provide a right of appeal against the Council’s decision. Rather, our role is to review the way the Council made its decision, and to consider if any fault in that process is likely to have affected the planning outcome.
7. In my view, there is not enough evidence to suggest that any fault is likely to have affected the outcome here, so we will not start an investigation. In reaching this view, I am mindful that:
• Mr and Mrs X’s objections are summarised in the report to the Planning Committee, and their photographs were included in the presentation at the meeting. The Committee Members were therefore aware of Mr and Mrs X’s concerns when reaching the decision on the application.
• The report and presentation to the Committee makes it clear that the application does not include the boundary wall because it benefits from permitted development rights, but considers whether the proposed building works are acceptable with and without the wall.
• The report considers the relevant material planning considerations, including the impact of the building works on the character/appearance of the area and Mr and Mrs X’s amenity.
• Party wall issues are a private, civil matter between Mr and Mrs X and their neighbour.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X ’s complaint because there is not enough evidence that fault is likely to have affected the planning outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman