Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to tell neighbours about a planning application. And the way it processed a planning application. We consider further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. Also the complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice and we cannot achieve the outcome she is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council:
• failed to notify her and others about a planning application
• failed to consider car parking, including loss of a disabled parking bay; and
• failed to consider ecological and environmental matters, including bats.

She wants the planning permission placed on hold and residents given the opportunity to comment on the application.

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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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 Mrs X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X says neither she nor her neighbours received letters from the Council telling them about the planning application for a new property close to their homes.
6. I cannot know why Mrs X, or her neighbours, did not receive the Council’s letters. However, in response to the complaint, the Council says its records show it sent the letters. The Council is not required to provide proof of postage. I consider that further investigation on this point is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
7. The Council provided planning records which show it consulted:
• the highways department
• the county ecologist
• Natural England
• the Environment Agency
• the local town council; and
• the environmental health team.
8. It confirms it received responses from Environmental Health, the town council, and the Highways department.
9. The Highways department asked the Council to confirm whether a disabled parking bay was still present on the road. Following a site visit, the Planning Officer confirmed the disabled parking bay no longer exists. The Highways team made no further comment.
10. The Planning Officer’s report shows the Council considered the impact of the proposal on residential amenity and the character of the area. The report explains why the Officer considered the proposal is acceptable.
11. Mrs X confirms the Council’s actions have not yet caused her any injustice.
12. She wants the planning permission to be placed on hold and residents given the opportunity to comment on the proposal. Planning permission has been granted and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• Further investigation into the complaint that the notification letters were not received will not lead to a different outcome.
• There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning application.
• Mrs X has not suffered a significant personal injustice; and
• We cannot achieve the outcome she is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman