Summary: Mr D complained, on behalf of Mrs X, about the Council’s decision to grant her neighbour planning permission for extensions and works to a property, including how she was notified about the development. She said the development caused her distress and impacted her residential amenity. We found no fault in how the Council notified Mrs X, considered the planning application, or responded to her complaint. It therefore reached a decision it was entitled to make.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr D, complained on behalf of his mother (Mrs X) about the Council’s decision to approve development and extensions to a neighbouring property. He said:
• it failed to properly notify Mrs X of the planning proposal before the planning decision was made;
• it failed to respond to and address her concerns about the development and the works taking place which impacts her amenity, privacy, and enjoyment of her property; and
• Mrs X had experienced harassment and victimisation by the neighbour during the development.
2. Mr D said, as a result, Mrs X is experiencing distress and an impact on her amenity due to dust, noise and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr D and Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr D and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law, guidance and policy

Planning permission

8. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies in the local development plan, unless other material planning considerations indicate they should not.
9. Planning considerations include things like:
• Access to the highway;
• Protection of ecological and heritage assets; and
• The impact on neighbouring amenity.
10. Planning considerations do not include things like:
• Views from a property;
• The impact of development on property value; and
• Private rights and interests in land.
11. Councils may impose planning conditions to make development acceptable in planning terms. Conditions should be necessary, precise, enforceable and reasonable in all other regards.

Decision making and material considerations

12. All decisions on planning applications must be made in accordance with the council’s development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
13. Material considerations relate to the use and development of land in the public interest, and not to private considerations such as the applicant’s personal conduct, covenants or reduction in the value of a property. Material considerations include issues such as overlooking, traffic generation and noise.
14. Government statements of planning policy are material considerations.
15. General planning policies may pull in different directions (for example in promoting residential development and protecting residential amenities).
16. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material consideration in determining a planning application.

Officer’s reports

17. The purpose of the case officer’s report is not merely to facilitate the decision, but to demonstrate the decisions were properly made and due process followed. Without an adequate report, we cannot know whether the council took proper account of the key material planning considerations or whether judgements were affected by irrelevant matters.
18. However, the courts have made it clear that case officer reports:
• do not need to include every possible planning consideration, but just the principal controversial issues.
• do not need to be perfect, as their intended audience are the parties to the application (the Council and the applicant) who are well versed of the issues; and
• should not be subject to hypercritical scrutiny, and do not merit challenge unless their overall effect is to significantly mislead the decision maker on the key, material issues.

Planning notifications

19. Regulations set out the minimum requirements for how councils publicise planning applications.
20. For applications such as minor developments, councils must publicise by either:
• a site notice; or
• serving notice on adjoining owners or occupiers.
21. As well as regulatory minimum requirements, councils must also produce a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). The SCI sets out the council’s policy on how it will communicate with the public when it carries out its functions. In their SCI policy councils may commit to do more than the minimum legal requirements, for example, to put up a site notice and to serve notice on adjoining owners or occupiers.
22. The Council’s SCI policy says it follows national planning policy to notify residents when a planning application is received. This includes to:
• send application notifications to all owners or occupiers of land which has a common border with the application site or is across the entry from the site;
• it will consider on a case-by-case basis if others should receive notifications; and
• it may offer documents in different language or offer a call to explain a development if this is requested.

What happened

23. In Autumn 2023 Mrs X’s neighbour (the developer) applied to the Council for planning permission for work to an existing building. This included a single and two storey side extension, changes to the layout of rooms, changes to windows, and a chimney. This was a revision of a previously refused planning application.
24. The Council validated the application, and sent notification letters to nearby neighbouring properties, including Mrs X who did not make any objections.
25. The developer made some amendments to the planning proposal in late 2023.
26. In early 2024 the Council approved the application through delegated powers, subject to conditions. The officers report sets out how the Council considered the application and reasons for its decision. This included:
• the objections it received, which raised concerns about odours from the chimney, the development would be out of keeping with other properties and amount to overdevelopment, and concerns about construction vehicles blocking the highway;
• how it had considered national and local planning policy;
• the ground for the previously refused planning application and how those concerns had been addressed in the application; and
• how it had considered the impact on neighbouring residential amenity, which included Mrs X.
27. The Council found the proposed development would be acceptable in planning terms and any impact on residential amenity was limited and acceptable.

Mr D’s complaint

28. In late 2024 Mr D complained, on Mrs X’s behalf, to the Council about the development and its planning approval. He said:
• Mrs X had not been given enough opportunity to share her objections as she does not speak English and did therefore not act on the Council’s planning proposal notification in late 2023. He also said it should have done more notify neighbours such as knocking on their doors;
• the developer had delayed the development as it had been nearly 12 months and only the footings had been completed;
• the developer’s plan for an internal gym should be insulated more, the chimney would cause odours, the distance between the development and Mrs X’s boundary would be limited, and it amounted to over development and overshadowed parts of her property;
• Mrs X was experiencing noise and dust on her property which meant this had to be cleaned weekly, and the developer was working into the evening on some occasions;
• the development could be a fire risk, would limit access for any wheelchair users at the side of the development property, and said some drainage pipes may have been damaged; and
• Mrs X had experienced harassment by the developer or his workers, which she had reported to the police.
29. The Council spoke with Mrs X’s neighbour following the complaint. This was to request consideration of impact on neighbours regarding working hours.
30. In response the Council did not uphold Mr D’s complaint. It explained it had properly considered the planning application. This included sending neighbour notifications to Mrs X. It offered her an interpreter to explain the development to her, but this was refused. It addressed each point of Mr X’s complaint, but found some other matters were for building control, the police, or was a private matter between the neighbours.
31. Mr D asked the Ombudsman to consider the complaint. He continues to believe the Council was at fault and made suggestions for financial remedies. He also said the Council’s failure to notify Mrs X more about the development may be discrimination.

Analysis and finding

The Council’s planning notification

32. Mr D feels it should have sent the notification in her name, in her language, and have done more to inform her about the proposal.
33. The Council notified Mrs X and other nearby neighbours by letter about the planning application. The letters were addressed to the owner or occupier of her property and gave a deadline for responses. This was what it was required to do and in line with its SCO policy.
34. The Council was not required to ensure the letter was in her name or language. However, once it became aware Mrs X had concerns about the planning approval, it offered to discuss this with her in her own language. This was also in line with its policy to support those with language or other difficulties.
35. I have therefore not found fault in how the Council notified Mrs X about her neighbour’s planning application.

The Council’s planning decision

36. The Council’s planning decision and officer’s reports sets out how it reached its view on Mrs X’s neighbour’s planning application. This included how it considered relevant material planning considerations such as national and local planning policy, objections, and impact on Mrs X’s residential amenity.
37. I have found no fault in the process the Council followed to reach its view. It therefore reached a decision it was entitled to make.
38. I acknowledge Mrs X is concerned about the development. In particular how it will impact daylight to parts of her property. However, without fault in the process the Council followed to reach its view, I cannot criticise the Council’s decision.

Mrs X’s concerns about the development and behaviour

39. The Council provided a detailed response to Mr D’s complaint which addressed Mrs X’s concerns about her neighbour’s development. I am satisfied the Council’s response was factual and addressed the concerns correctly and appropriately. This included:
• the time it was taking her neighbour to progress the development. It explained the developer only have to start the development within three years;
• the working hours and noise from the development. It explained this was an enforcement issue it had contacted the developer to be considerate regarding the hours of work. If issues continued she could report concerns to its enforcement team;
• dust from works can be expected from development. It explained any damage, cleaning at Mrs X’s property, or party wall concerns were a private matter between her and her neighbour;
• concerns about fire safety and access to the property was for building control, which would consider such concerns during the development;
• concerns about harassment. It explained this was not part of the initial complaint, but Mrs X had correctly brought such concerns to the attention of the police and no further action had been taken; and
• it had already considered Mrs X’s concerns about the development in its officer’s report, which included the distances between the properties, roof layout and the chimney, overshadowing, and how the development impacted the local area.
40. I found the Council’s responses to Mrs X and Mr D to be clear and helpful, and I have seen no evidence it actions, or any inaction, amounted to discrimination.

Back to top

Decision

41. I have completed my investigation with a finding of no fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman