Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s grant of planning permission. This is because we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X. The Council considered Mr X’s comments on the planning application and we cannot question its judgement on whether the issue he raised was a material consideration.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for development on consecrated ground in 2019. He is part of a voluntary organisation which has campaigned to protect and safeguard the graves of the people buried on the site and says the Council failed to properly consider his comments on the planning application. He also questions its decision in 2018 that the development had commenced.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to us about the Council’s handling of the planning application in 2019. We decided not to investigate at the time because the development could not proceed; this meant the Council’s decision, whether it was affected by fault or not, had not caused him or the organisation significant injustice.
8. Mr X has come back to us now because this situation has changed. The development is now able to proceed and Mr X remains concerned about the way the Council made its decision. In particular he challenges the Council’s decision that the effect of the development on buried remains is not a material planning consideration.
9. We have however previously explained to Mr X that we are unable to determine if the issue is a material planning consideration and this remains the case now. The Council addressed Mr X’s point in detail in the planning officer’s report and we have no power to question its judgement on the issue. We cannot therefore say the Council was wrong in its view that the issue was not material to the planning process and we cannot in any event revoke the planning permission granted by the Council.
10. It follows that we will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision, taken in 2018, that the development had already commenced. This was not part of Mr X’s previous complaint and it is therefore late, as he has known about it for more than 12 months. But even if the complaint was in-time we could not overturn the Council’s decision; this is a matter for the courts.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X by investigating the matter further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman