Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council granted planning permission. This is because we do not consider Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to question the veracity of a Housing Needs Survey connected to a planning application for six houses in the village where he lives.
2. He also says:
• The Planning Officer misled the parish council by removing the location of the development in the Housing Needs Survey questionnaire
• The Council failed to acknowledge the proposal failed to meet a Council’s planning policies; and
• The Council approved under occupation in the section 106 legal agreement which goes against Council policy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X says the development of six new houses in the village where he lives:
• is out of character with the area and with the village design statement
• will spoil the village; and
• will set a precedent for future development within the area of outstanding natural beauty.
7. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Housing Needs Survey which was commissioned by the parish council and conducted by a third party. However, the Council confirms it is satisfied with the Survey and does not agree with Mr X’s views.
8. I also understand Mr X is concerned granting planning permission will set a precedent for development in the village. However, past planning decisions can be considered as examples or references in future cases, but they are not legally required to be followed. Each application must be assessed on its own merits and specific circumstances.
9. Mr X believes the development is out of character with the village will spoil it. However, we consider this is not a sufficient personal injustice to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we do not consider he has suffered enough personal injustice to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman