Wakefield City Council (25 002 992)

Category : Planning > Planning applications

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 15 Jul 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled Mr X’s concerns about the impact of development near his home. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

  1. Mr X says the Council did not properly consider the impact of development of land near his home, including non-compliance with design guidelines, previous planning applications, overlooking from windows and the visibility splay and associated risks to road users.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).
  2. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. In November 2024 Mr X’s neighbour submitted a planning application to build a house on land near Mr X’s home, with access to the property from the existing highway. The Council consulted with neighbouring residents who submitted their concerns about the development.
  2. The case officers report shows the Council considered the issues that were relevant to the planning process.
  3. The report summarises objections received to the proposal including the impact on neighbouring properties and the highway. The planning officer determined it would not result in any harmful impact on neighbours or road users. This was a decision they were entitled to reach.
  4. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. We look at the processes an organisation followed in making its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether a complainant disagrees with the decision made.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings