Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a planning application before deciding to grant planning permission. We have not seen sufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the application to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to fully consider a planning application before granting planning permission.

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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complains the Council failed to fully consider a planning application for a slurry lagoon at a farm near his home. He says he is concerned about
• Odour
• Toxins
• Proximity to his home
• Contamination of the watercourse
• Spoiling his view; and
• The impact of the slurry lagoon on his health.
6. Planning controls the design, location and appearance of development and its impact on public amenity. Planning controls are not designed to protect private rights or interests. The Council may grant planning permission with conditions to control the use or development of land.
7. Local Planning Authorities must consider each application it receives on its own merits and decide it in line with their local planning policies, unless material considerations suggest otherwise. Material considerations concern the use and development of land in the public interest and include issues such as overlooking, traffic generation and noise. People’s comments on planning and land use issues linked to development proposals will be material considerations. Councils must take such comments into account but do not have to agree with those comments.
8. A council planning officer will normally visit the application site and write a report assessing the proposed development. The report will refer to relevant planning policies and the planning history of the site; summarise peoples’ comments; and consider the main planning issues for deciding the application. The assessment often involves the planning officer in balancing and weighing the planning issues and judging the merits of the proposed development. The report usually ends with a recommendation to grant or refuse planning permission.
9. A senior planning officer will consider most reports, but some go to the council’s planning committee for councillors to decide the application. The senior officer (or councillors at committee) may disagree with the case officer’s recommendation because it is for the decision maker to decide the weight given to any material consideration when deciding a planning application. Development usually gets planning permission if the council considers it is in line with planning policy and finds no planning reason(s) of enough weight to justify a refusal.

What happened

10. The Council received an application to build a slurry lagoon at a farm close to Mr X’s home.
11. Mr X and others objected to the application.
12. The case officer wrote a report of the proposal. The report includes a summary of all the objections to the application, including those from Mr X and the parish council.
13. The courts made it clear that 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 experienced 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.
14. Councils will grant permission where they consider proposals are in line with relevant planning policies and they find no planning reasons of sufficient weight to justify refusal.
15. The Council’s planning committee considered the application. Mr X’s neighbour and a representative from the parish council and a district councillor spoke at the committee meeting objecting to the application. The Council debated the application and having considered all the information the committee voted to grant planning permission.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning application.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman