Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his planning application and appeal. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and we cannot alter the outcome of his appeal. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s refusal to allow him to reapply for planning permission for free, and if Mr X wishes to show his proposed development does not require planning permission it would be reasonable for him to apply for a formal decision and appeal against any refusal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr, X, complains the Council withheld information and provided incorrect information about his appeal against its decision to refuse his planning application. He also complains the Council did not allow him a ‘free go’ following the refusal and that it is wrong to suggest he needs planning permission for the proposal at all.

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 a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
5. 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. We cannot investigate any complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s planning application or its decision. This is because Mr X has applied to the Planning Inspectorate to appeal against the decision. Although the Planning Inspectorate ultimately rejected Mr X’s appeal this does not alter the fact that we have no jurisdiction to consider these issues.
8. Mr X complains about the information the Council provided about his appeal, which he says led to the Planning Inspectorate’s decision to reject it, but he has made the point to the Planning Inspectorate and they decided it did not provide grounds to consider the matter further. We could not achieve anything more for Mr X because we cannot say the Planning Inspectorate must consider the appeal and we cannot determine whether the Council’s decision to refuse Mr X’s application was correct.
9. While Mr X believes the Council has deprived him of his ability to resubmit his application for free as what was known as a ‘free go’, the government removed the entitlement to a free go for any application decided after 6 December 2023. Mr X does not therefore qualify for it and the Council is not at fault for failing to provide it.
10. With regard to Mr X’s contention that his development does not require planning permission, this is a matter for the planning process. The fact Mr X has applied for planning permission twice suggests he accepts the proposal does require planning permission but if he felt it did not, and that the development was in fact ‘permitted development’ under The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended), he could have applied for a certificate of lawful use or development. This would have provided a definitive view on the issue and if the Council refused the application, and if Mr X disagreed with its decision, he could have appealed.
11. Mr X suggests it is confusing as to whether he needs permission from the Council or approval from the local highway authority but it is possible he needs both. The Council is the appropriate body to consider planning applications but it is not the local highway authority. If Mr X wishes to pursue a complaint against the local highway authority he would need to raise this separately.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and it is unlikely we could achieve anything for him.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman