Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a boundary treatment for a planning decision. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation, and we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. Complaints about freedom of information requests are for the Information Commissioner.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council wrongly granted approval for a development next to her property. She says it has not adhered to the planning decision to safeguard the privacy currently enjoyed by residents. Mrs X installed her own fence to regain privacy. She says the Council has not properly responded to her freedom of information (FOI) requests.

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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint

(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)
4. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X complains the approved development next to her property failed to safeguard her privacy by installing a boundary shorter than was proposed in the original planning application. The Council considered the impact of a lower fence in the amended application. It reviewed the evidence during the complaints process and decided there was no significant loss of privacy. We could not add to any previous investigation. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, so we cannot question the outcome.
8. Mrs X says the Council did not properly respond to her FOI requests. Matters about FOI requests should be raised with the Information Commissioner (see paragraph 4).

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we could not add to any previous investigation. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, so we cannot question the outcome. Mrs X should raise any complaint about FOI requests to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman