Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to approve his neighbour’s planning application and a later decision to approve a variation to the plans. We cannot add to the Council’s investigation into the original application and there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to approve the variation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council made errors in the way it considered his neighbours’ planning application and a later variation to the plans. He says the planning approval has caused him and his family unnecessary distress and led to their property being overlooked. He wants the Council to apologise and compensate him for the loss of privacy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

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

3. 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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X bought his property in 2023. At the time of buying the property his neighbours already had planning permission to extend their property following two planning applications in 2022.
7. During the build, Mr X alerted the Council to a window opening that did not appear on all the drawings in the original applications. The Council told the neighbours to stop work. It said the window was not approved under the 2022 planning permission. It invited the neighbour to apply for a variation to their planning permission so it could properly consider the window. The Council approved the variation in January 2024.
8. Mr X complained to the Council. He said the Council should have spotted the inconsistency between the original drawings and had not properly considered the variation. He added the Council had also failed to notify neighbouring properties in 2022 and had not properly considered the impact of the development on neighbour amenity.
9. The Council accepted there were inconsistencies in the original drawings. It said it had taken suitable enforcement action once it became aware of the window. It said asking for a variation on the original application was an accepted method of enforcement and it had then properly considered the variation request. The Council said it had notified the required neighbouring properties in 2022 and was satisfied it had properly considered the impact on neighbour amenity as part of the original application.
10. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has accepted there were inconsistencies in the original drawings and taken enforcement action by inviting a variation application. We could not add to the Council’s investigation and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
11. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council then considered the variation application. The records show the Council visited the site and considered Mr X’s comments and other material considerations before deciding to approve the application. This was a decision the Council was entitled to make. The records also show the Council complied with statutory notification requirements and considered the potential impact on neighbour amenity as part of the original application.
12. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body for planning decisions. We cannot question a decision because someone disagrees with it. There must be evidence of fault in how the Council made the decision. In this case, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation. We cannot question a decision taken without fault.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation. We cannot question a decision taken without fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman