Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a possible breach of planning control. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his neighbour’s planning application. Mr X says the decision to grant planning permission was based on inaccurate information. He says the Council failed to notify him about the application and the development will have a significant impact on his home.
2. Mr X has also complained about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control. He says the Council has not properly looked into his concerns or taken any action in relation to the breach.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. When a local authority receives a planning application it must look at the development plan and material planning considerations to decide if the proposal is acceptable. Material considerations relate to the use and development of the land in the public interest and includes matters such as the impact on neighbouring properties and the relevant planning policies. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material considerations in determining a planning application.
6. Mr X has raised many concerns about how the Council dealt with his neighbour’s planning application. He says the plans were not accurate and the ownership certificate submitted with the application was not correctly completed. The Council has accepted there were issues with some of the plans included with the application and that the joint owner of the property should have been included on the ownership certificate. However, I do not consider these issues impacted the Council’s decision to grant planning permission. The case officer also visited the site to assess the proposal and was therefore aware of the relationship between the properties before deciding the development was acceptable.
7. Mr X says the Council did not notify him about the application. But even if the Council did not publicise the application as it should have, I do not consider Mr X has suffered any significant injustice as a result as he still knew about the application and commented on the proposal. The case officer’s report summarised Mr X’s objections and addressed the concerns he raised before deciding the development would not have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties.
8. Mr X says the development is not being built in line with the approved plans and the Council has failed to take any action in relation to the breach.
9. Planning authorities can take enforcement action where there has been a breach of planning control. A breach of planning control includes circumstances where someone has built a development without permission. It is for the council to decide if there has been a breach of planning control and if it is expedient to take further action.
10. The Council says its enforcement investigation is ongoing. As the enforcement investigation has not concluded, it is not yet possible to determine if Mr X has suffered any significant injustice as a result of any alleged fault with the Council’s investigation. The Council may still decide there has not been a breach of planning control or that enforcement action is not necessary.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered any significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman