Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning approval for an application which is in conflict with the Durham County Plan (DCP) and the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA). We will not investigate the complaint because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met and there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council gave approval for a large housing development with site access to it in conflict with the SHLAA and the DCP which was the basis of consultation with the public.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. 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 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, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s response to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complaints disagree. We cannot question council decisions if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information.
7. While the site access for the development is contrary to that outlined in the DCP, the Council has explained that the alternative proposed by the applicant was assessed and considered an acceptable and safe alternative. This is a decision for the Council to make and its merits cannot be reviewed by the Ombudsman. There is no evidence to suggest fault affected the decision.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met and there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman