Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting planning permission for a development which the complainant says encroaches on his property. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council granting planning permission for a development which he says overhangs/encroaches upon his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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 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))
3. We can 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)
4. And it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X, which included his complaint correspondence with the Council.
• information about the planning application, on the Council’s website.
• the Council’s ‘scheme of delegation’.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. I appreciate Mr X is unhappy the Council approved his neighbour’s planning application.
7. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
8. I consider there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council has determined this application to justify starting an investigation. In reaching this view, I am mindful that:
• The Council’s February 2024 neighbour notification letter explains it will not acknowledge receipt of representations and will not write to interested parties to let them know the outcome.
• The case officer visited the application site and Mr X’s property, so would have been aware of the character of the surrounding area.
• Mr X’s objections are summarised in the case officer’s report.
• The officer’s report goes on to address Mr X’s concerns about the development encroaching on to his property.
• Planning is concerned with land use in the public interest. Therefore, it is not the Council’s role to adjudicate in a boundary dispute; rather, this is a civil matter.
• Planning permission does not override ownership rights.
9. As we are not proposing to investigate Mr X’s substantive concerns about the handling of the planning application, it would not be a good use of our resources to investigate his associated concerns about the Council’s complaint process in isolation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman