Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning permission as there is no evidence of fault causing sufficient injustice to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the grant of planning permission for a replacement shed near him.

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
• 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X’s neighbour submitted a planning application for a replacement shed which was subsequently granted.
6. Mr X objected to the planning application and the Planning Officer noted that objection. Mr X says that there were flaws in the way the planning application was considered. He says that the conservation of a nearby tree was not properly considered and the building could be used for alternative purposes. I am satisfied that the Planning Officer’s report dealt with these and other issues Mr X raised.
7. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot criticise the merits of that decision. I am satisfied that Mr X’s objections were properly considered.
8. The shed is on the other side of the road from Mr X’s house and there are high hedges in between. The shed will not be seen from Mr X’s house and will not affect his amenity.
9. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
10. Mr X has pursued his objections as he is entitled to, but that effort is not an injustice we would pursue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault causing a significant injustice to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman