Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Planning Officer’s report. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for a development close to where she lives. She said the Council’s Planning Officer’s report failed to properly consider the planning application and include relevant information such as a previous Planning Inspector’s report. She wants the Council to either rescind the permission or made additional planning conditions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
3. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies in the local development plan, unless other material planning considerations indicate they should not.
7. We can look at the Council’s decision-making process, but we can’t say if a decision is right or wrong. The Council should take account of law, policy, relevant evidence, and information. If it has followed those steps we cannot find fault.
8. The Council confirmed that after receiving the planning application it put up a site notice and wrote to immediate neighbours as part of the consultation process. The Planning Officer’s report included the material planning considerations and the objections raised about the development. The report noted some concerns with the site and how these conflicted with Policy, however, it decided on balance to support the development. It set out its reasons for this.
9. The Council’s Planning Committee considered the application. The minutes show objectors spoke at this meeting. They raised concerns about the previous Planning Inspector’s report, boundary issues and other concerns. The Planning Committee asked questions; following that they voted and approved the application.
10. The Council has followed the correct steps in how it consulted on the application. The Planning Officer’s report included material considerations, objections and their professional view. In addition, objectors also had the opportunity to present their concerns to the Planning Committee for consideration. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council considered the planning application to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman