Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning applications. This is because it is unlikely an investigation would add to the Council’s response or achieve anything more for the complainant.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about comments the Council’s conservation officer made when they were consulted on his planning applications. Mr X says the conservation officer incorrectly said he had carried out unauthorised work to the listed building.

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:

• 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
• 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X applied to the Council for planning permission and listed building consent. The planning case officer consulted the conservation officer who provided comments on the proposed development. Mr X says the conservation officer incorrectly said he had carried out unauthorised work that compromised the significance of the listed building.
5. The Council accepts this was wrong and the development referred to by the conservation officer was authorised. The Council says the error was made as the officer was a temporary contractor and they did not know how to access older planning files. The Council has apologised and says it is working to secure more resources, so it does not need to rely on temporary staff. It also says it will ensure officers are given access to the records they need. The Council says the incorrect comments will be removed from the application. I consider it unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman could add to the Council’s response or achieve anything more for Mr X.
6. I understand Mr X also disagrees with other comments made by the conservation officer. But even if I were to find fault in this regard, I do not consider Mr X suffered any significant injustice as his applications were approved.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response or achieve anything more by investigating his complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman