Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a breach of planning control. Mr X says the decision to grant planning permission was not in line with the Council’s policy and the development will have a significant impact on his home and the surrounding area. Mr X also complains the development has not been built in line with the approved plans.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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.
7. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body for planning decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
8. In this case, I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the acceptability of the development before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report addressed the impact on the area and neighbouring properties. However, the officer decided the scale and design of the building was acceptable and would not have a harmful impact on residential amenity. The Council also explained further in response to Mr X’s complaint why it considered the development was acceptable.
9. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant planning permission. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide the application was acceptable and the Ombudsman cannot question this decision unless it was tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered the application, it is unlikely I could find fault.
10. Mr X says the development has not been built in line with the approved plans as it has been built on a raised platform. Mr X says this increases the impact the development has on his property.
11. 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. Government guidance stresses the importance of affective enforcement action to maintain public confidence in the planning system but says councils should act proportionately.
12. The Council looked into Mr X’s concerns and spoke to his neighbour. It accepted that ground levels in the garden had increased. However, it decided it would not be expedient to take enforcement action. I understand Mr X may disagree. But councils do not need to take enforcement action just because there has been a breach of planning control. I am satisfied the Council properly considered if it should take enforcement action and it has explained why it did not consider this necessary. It was entitled to use its professional judgement in this regard.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman