Summary: On behalf of Mr X, Mr B complained the Council approved planning permission which meant Mr X is no longer able to access his field with the necessary agricultural machinery. We find the Council at fault for delays in the complaint handling process. The Council has agreed to pay Mr X £250 to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. On behalf of Mr X, Mr B complained the Council approved planning permission which meant Mr X was no longer able to safely access his field with the necessary agricultural machinery. He also complained communication from the Council has been poor, including late responses, failure to respond, incorrect advice and an intimidating phone call during which a Council officer threatened to issue an enforcement notice on a new gateway. Mr B says Mr X incurred significant costs to install a new gated entrance and he has experienced unnecessary and significant worry and stress. Mr B would like the Council to reimburse the cost Mr X incurred to install the new gateway and for staff to be held accountable for maladministration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated the Council’s actions in approving the planning permission for the footpath and the Council’s correspondence and complaint handling.
6. I have not investigated the phone call which took place between the Council and Mr B, as it is unlikely we would be able to gather sufficient, clear evidence to justify a finding of maladministration.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I discussed this complaint with Mr B and considered the evidence he provided.
8. I considered evidence provided by the Council.
9. Mr B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered any comments I received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

Decision making and material considerations

10. All decisions on planning applications must be made in accordance with the council’s development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
11. Material considerations relate to the use and development of land in the public interest, and not to private considerations such as the applicant’s personal conduct, covenants or reduction in the value of a property. Material considerations include issues such as overlooking, traffic generation and noise.
12. Local opposition or support for a proposal is not in itself a ground for refusing or granting planning permission, unless is it founded upon valid material planning reasons.
13. Government statements of planning policy are material considerations.
14. General planning policies may pull in different directions (eg in promoting residential development and protecting residential amenities).
15. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material consideration in determining a planning application.

The Council’s complaint policy

16. The Council’s published complaints policy sets out a two stage process. At stage one of the process the policy says the Council will aim to provide a response within 30 working days of acknowledging the complaint. If the Council cannot provide a response within 30 working days it should contact the complainant and give a timescale of when the response will be provided.
17. At stage two of the complaints process the policy says the Council will aim to provide a response within 30 working days of acknowledging the stage two request. If the Council cannot provide a response within 30 working days it should contact the complainant and give a timescale of when the response will be provided.

What happened

Planning permission

18. The following is a summary of key events. It is not intended to be a complete chronology.
19. The Council received a planning application for a housing development in September 2016. Following a period of consultation, the Council approved the planning application in August 2018.
20. As part of the consultation the highway authority worked with the applicant to develop a footway to safely link the site to the rest of the village. This footway was audited by an independent road safety audit company and no fundamental issues were raised. The footpath was therefore added to the planning permission which was approved in August 2018.
21. There is no evidence the Council was made aware of any access issues relating to the footpath and Mr X’s field prior to approving the planning application.
22. Following completion of the footpath in March 2023, Mr X discovered he could no longer safely access his field using the existing gateway due to the narrowing of the road and cars parking alongside the new footpath. Mr X has installed a new gateway to allow safe access to his field.

Correspondence and complaint handling

23. Between May 2023 and November 2023, Mr X contacted the Council to discuss reimbursement of the new gateway. Three of Mr X's letters to the Council did not receive a response.
24. Mr X contacted the Council in May 2023 to ask the Council to repay the costs involved to move his gateway because of the new footpath. The Council responded to Mr X informally and did not provide a formal stage one complaint response until November 2023.
25. Mr X escalated his complaint to stage two at the end of November 2023. The Council provided its response almost 5 months later in April 2024. The Council offered an apology and a symbolic payment of £250 to recognise the frustration caused by the delay.

Back to top

My findings

Planning permission

26. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made. We look for evidence of fault causing significant injustice to the individual complainant.
27. Before it made its planning decision the Council:
• Completed a thorough consultation period.
• Took advice from the highway authority and other relevant parties.
• Completed a thorough officer’s report.
28. The Council followed the correct process in approving the planning permission, so I find no fault in the way the Council made its decisions.

Correspondence and complaint handling

29. There were occasions where the Council failed to respond to Mr X’s letters. This caused Mr X frustration and uncertainty.
30. There was delay in the Council’s correspondence with Mr X and Mr B. This caused Mr X frustration and uncertainty. The Council has apologised and offered a financial remedy of £250 which is a proportionate response to the fault identified.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. Within one month of the final decision the Council will make the pre-agreed symbolic payment of £250 to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty caused by its failure to respond to Mr X’s letters and the delay in responding to his complaint.
32. Within three months of the final decision the Council will remind its planning officers of its complaints policy and ensure that they understand the process for acknowledging and handling complaints whenever complaints are received.
33. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

34. We uphold this complaint. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman