Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission and how it responded to complainant’s subsequent complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complain there are clear errors in the way the Council reached its decision to grant planning permission. They say the building work has impacted their health and wellbeing, leaving them anxious and having to spend money on solicitors.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, and relevant online planning documents, maps and images.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr and Mrs X raise several concerns relating to the planning permission a neighbour was granted. The key issues relate to the impact on the amenity of their property, the way in which the decision was made and the Council’s handling of their complaint.
6. The officer’s report shows they considered the impact the work would have on Mr and Mrs X’s residence, as well as the neighbouring properties and conservation area nearby. They carried out an assessment that considered the appropriate policies and guidance. This assessment included the potential for overlooking and character of the local area.
7. Mr and Mrs X raise concerns regarding their Right to Light, and structural issues relating to the building work. The Council considered any loss of light but decided it would not be significant enough to justify refusal of planning permission. However, the Rights of Light Act 1959 and any structural issues relating to building work do not fall to the Council to assess:
• The 1959 Act deals with legal rights Mr and Mrs X would need to pursue as set out in law.
• The Party Wall etc Act 1996 governs what must happen if someone wishes to carry out work within 1m of a party or boundary wall, and any dispute about that is a private law matter between the adjoining owners.
8. In response to the issues raised around building work impacting on the accessibility to their property, the Council had issued a Construction Management Plan condition when granting permission to mitigate the risk. The risk of being overlooked was also mitigated by imposing obscure glazing on certain windows.
9. We consider the procedures the Council followed to make its decisions. We may only criticise a council’s decision where there is evidence of fault in its decision-making process and, but for that fault, the Council might have made a different decision. We cannot therefore criticise the decision or intervene with an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman