Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. The complainant has also not suffered significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his planning application. He says the Council failed to properly communicate with him, the case officer was unprofessional and did not consider the information he provided. Mr X says he has incurred unnecessary costs and wasted time because of the Council’s actions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
4. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• Delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• A decision to refuse planning permission
• Conditions placed on planning permission
• A planning enforcement notice.

5. 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

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X says he withdrew his application as he was concerned about how it was being dealt with. However, Mr X could have chosen not to withdraw the application and appealed to the Planning Inspector if he was unhappy with how long it was taking the Council to decide the application or if it refused planning permission. Mr X also would have had the right to appeal if he disagreed with any conditions placed on the planning permission. I consider it would have been reasonable for Mr X to have used his right to appeal. The Ombudsman will not usually investigate when someone has a right to appeal to the Planning Inspector, even if the appeal would not address all the issues complained about.
8. Mr X has raised concerns about the actions of the case officer and says they did not properly communicate with him. But I do not consider the injustice suffered as a result, significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he had a right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. Mr X has not suffered significant injustice in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman