Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for an extension to her neighbour’s property. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms B complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for an extension to her neighbour’s property. Ms B says the Council did not speak to her or visit her property before deciding the application. Ms B also says the Council did not give proper consideration to the impact of the development on her 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 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 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms B and have viewed planning records on the Council’s website. I have also viewed the area on Google Maps and Google Streetview.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. I have not seen any information to indicate the Council’s assessment of this planning application was affected by fault.
7. A Council officer visited the application site and took photographs. The officer wrote a report setting out their consideration of the application.
8. This included consideration of the impact of the development on the amenity of Ms B’s property. The officer explained why they considered the impact, including Ms B’s concerns about loss of light, to be acceptable. The Council has also provided further explanation in response to Ms B’s complaint.
9. Planning officers are not required to visit or contact adjoining residents when assessing an application and this is often not necessary. Also, the slight difference in land levels between the properties would have been evident to the case officer during their visit.
10. Unless there is evidence of fault in the decision-making process, we cannot say the Council was right or wrong to grant the application planning permission.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman