Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the validation process for the complainant’s listed building applications. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, and it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have appealed to the Planning Inspector about the validation requirements.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of the validation of her listed building consent applications.

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

• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. In relation to the first bullet point above, 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)
4. And in relation to the second bullet point, the law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• information provided by Ms X and the Council, which included their complaint correspondence.
• the Council’s ‘Validation Guide’.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Ombudsman will not start an investigation into Ms X’s complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its handling of the validation process.
7. When a planning authority receives an application, it must first validate it. To do so, the Council will need to ensure it has received the necessary information and application fee. There will be national information requirements such as plans and ownership certificates. Councils will also have their own local requirements for information.
8. It is for the Council to decide whether it has all the necessary information in order to validate a planning application, and it is not the Council’s role to produce/prepare this information for an applicant. The Council’s building control officers were also entitled to reach a professional judgement, having conducted a site visit, on whether the works constituted an emergency. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body against these decisions, where they have been properly taken. I also understand the Council has corresponded with Ms X in some detail to explain what information it required to enable her applications to be validated.
9. As such there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify starting an investigation.
10. Furthermore, the law provides a right of appeal for disputes about the validation of planning applications. If Ms X was concerned the Council had failed to validate her applications without good reason it would have been reasonable for her to serve notice on the Council under Article 12 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015. If the Council had then issued a ‘non-validation notice’ or failed to reply, we would have expected Ms X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council handling the validation of her applications, and it is reasonable to expect her to have used her right of appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman