Redcar & Cleveland Council (24 004 240)
Category : Planning > Planning applications
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 21 Jul 2024
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning and a footpath order because they are matters for the Planning Inspector.
The complaint
- Ms X complains that, following the grant of planning permission for development, the Council agreed to an order to modify a footpath which affects her business.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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)
- The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a 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)
- The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:
- Delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
- A decision to refuse planning permission
- Conditions placed on planning permission
- A planning enforcement notice.
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Ms X obtained planning permission for a development in December 2022. Subsequently an application was made by a neighbour for a modification order of a footpath on land which Ms X says will affect her business.
- The Council was satisfied that the path had been used for at least 20 years and granted the order. The path itself was temporarily closed whilst work commenced. The closure is now a decision for the Planning Inspector. Following objections, the modification is also to be considered by a Planning Inspector.
- The Ombudsman cannot investigate any matter which could be appealed to a Planning Inspector. In this case, the determination of the footpath will be considered by a Planning Inspector and the Ombudsman would not therefore investigate the Council’s decision.
- Ms X says that the Council should sell her part of the land. The Council leased the land to Ms X but will not sell the freehold interest in the land. There is no evidence of fault by the Council in this matter. It is a discretionary matter for the Council to decide whether or not it wishes to sell its land.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council there are matters for the Planning Inspector.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman