Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about e Council’s handling of a planning application for a site next to the complainant’s home. There is not enough evidence of fault leading to the decision to approve the application.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to properly consider a planning application for a new property on a plot next to his home.

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.

(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 Mr X and information available on the Council’s website.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I understand Mr X is unhappy the Council granted planning permission for a new property to be built next to his home.
6. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body, so we cannot overrule decisions on planning applications. Rather, our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made, and to consider whether any fault is likely to have affected the planning outcome.
7. From the information I have seen there is not enough evidence to suggest that any fault has affected the outcome of the planning application.

8. In coming to this decision, I am aware the planning officer visited the application site. They were aware of the proximity of Mr X’s home to the application site, the location of the hedgerow and the access arrangements and possible overshadowing.
9. The planning officer prepared a report on the proposal. This includes:
• a summary of Mr X’s objections and those from other members of the public
• the relevant nation and local planning policies
• consideration of the impact of the proposal on Mr X residential amenity; and
• an explanation of why the officer considers the scheme acceptable.
10. The report also notes there were no objections to the proposal from the following consultees:
• Highway Authority
• Public Protection Service
• Urban Designer
• National Infrastructure Team
• Waste Services ; and
• the Local Lead Flood Authority.
11. It is clear Mr X disagrees with the officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission. However, the recommendation was made by an officer exercising their professional judgement.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning application to justify out involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman