Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council delayed in processing a planning application. The Council has apologised for the delays and stated what it has done to improve. Therefore, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not communicate with him about his planning application. He stated the Council ignored his planning application which made him unable to plan for the future. He would like the Council to determine his planning application and for the Council to change its practices, so others do not face a similar issue.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(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 submitted a planning application to the Council in 2023. The Council should have determined his application by Spring 2024. It did not. Mr X subsequently complained to the Council regarding the time taken to consider his planning application.
6. Mr X complained that the Council’s lack of communication with him in summer 2024 contributed to him losing his appeal right for non-determination of a planning application.
7. In its complaint response, the Council apologised to Mr X for failing to respond to communication from Mr X and his planning agent. It recognised the failure to respond and pro-actively manage Mr X’s application contributed to Mr X’s loss of appeal right for non-determination.
8. It also apologised to Mr X for the time taken to decide his planning application. The Council stated it has a backlog of planning applications and extra resources had been brought in to help with the applications.
9. The Council also apologised for the time taken to respond to Mr X’s complaint. It stated that it had introduced regular meetings between the complaints and planning teams to help improve their complaint handling.
10. The Council has apologised for the delays in determining the planning application, communication failings with Mr X and his agent and for the delay in considering his complaint. The Council has stated what steps it has taken to improve processing planning applications, and complaint handling. The Council’s actions remedy any injustice caused. Additionally, the Council has made a decision on Mr X’s planning application. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council have apologised and stated what it has done to make improvements. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman