Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered a planning application to warrant our involvement. Also, the Council has apologised for the delay in uploading information to its website and further investigation of this point will not lead to a different outcome. Finally, we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the way the Council considered a planning application. She says the Council:
• Delayed in putting documents on its website.
• Failed to carry out any of her suggested remedies.
• Misled the planning committee by omitting certain information.
• Failed to answer all her concerns; and
• Failed to produce a satisfactory highway assessment.
2. Mrs X wants the Council to:
• Return the planning application to the planning committee for revocation or modification.
• Send the applications to discharge any planning conditions to the planning committee.
• Restore documents to its website.
• Present her complaint to the planning committee and provide a public apology; and
• Change procedures.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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 Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In response to Mrs X’s complaint the Council advised:
• Officers had concerns about some allegations made in late representations it received and sought legal advice before publishing them.
• The late representations were circulated to planning committee members before the meeting. They were also printed and available to the public at the meeting.
• There was a delay in a Google Earth image being posted on the website due to human error. It apologised for this and uploaded the image to the website.
• The Planning Officer’s report on the proposal was published on the website a week before the meeting. However, drawings of the passing places were not received until two working days before the meeting.
• The report contains a summary of the objections received.
• A construction plan is not considered necessary.
• The Highway team did not object to the application.
• The report refers to a passing place to be secured off-site by a planning condition; and
• Members were fully aware of what was being proposed.
7. The meeting minutes show the committee debated the application which included but was not limited to:
• Considering the late representations and photos from Mrs X.
• Verbal comments made by Mrs X, representatives from two parish councils, the local councillor and the applicant.
• considering the traffic data and history.
8. The application at the heart of Mrs X’s complaint was considered by the Planning Committee for about one hour and 20 minutes. It is for committee members to decide whether they have enough information to make a decision. This is what happened in this case.
9. The minutes of the meeting show the relevant information was discussed. If members felt they did not have enough time to consider the application they could have deferred it to a later date. They chose not to do so. This is a decision the Council is entitled to make.
10. Planning permission has been granted. We cannot require the Council to revoke the permission and have the application reheard or modified.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the application to warrant our involvement.
12. The Council has apologised for the delay in publishing information and advised the information is now on its website. Further investigation on this point will not lead to a different outcome.
13. Mrs X wants the Council to revoke the planning permission and send it back to the planning permission for modification. This is not something we can achieve.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman