Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not suffered significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council has dealt with a planning application. Mr X says the Council did not consult him about the development and ignored resident’s objections. Mr X says the development will have a significant impact on his property.

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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(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. Councils are required to give publicity to planning applications. The publicity required depends on the nature of the development. However, in all cases the application must be published on the Council’s website.
6. In this case, Mr X says he was not notified about the application. However, even if the Council failed to publicise the application as it should have, I do not consider Mr X has suffered any significant injustice as a result.
7. I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the acceptability of the development before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report summarised resident’s objections and addressed the concerns raised. The report also considered the impact on the area, neighbouring properties and parking before deciding the proposal was acceptable. The application was also discussed by members of the planning committee before they voted to grant permission for the development.
8. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant planning permission. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide the application was acceptable. As the Council properly considered the acceptability of the application, it is likely the decision to grant planning permission would be the same had Mr X known about the application and objected.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman