Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complaint is late. It is also unlikely we would find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with a planning application for a development near his home. Mr X says the development has a significant impact on his property and the Council should have applied a condition to the planning permission to ensure screening was installed to protect his privacy.

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. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X has complained about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission. However, I consider his complaint about the planning decision late. A complaint is late if it has taken someone more than 12 months to complain to the Ombudsman. It has been a few years since the planning permission was granted, and Mr X knew about the development at the time. I see no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate as Mr X could have complained to the Ombudsman sooner.
7. Furthermore, even if Mr X’s complaint was on time, my decision not to investigate would be the same. I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the acceptability of the development, including the impact on neighbouring properties, before granting planning permission. The Council also explained in response to Mr X’s complaint why it did not consider there would be an unacceptable impact on his privacy and why further planning conditions were not required.
8. Mr X disagrees and says his home will lose value. But the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide the application was acceptable and the Ombudsman cannot question this decision unless it was tainted by fault. Loss of property value is also not a material planning consideration. As the Council properly considered the application it is unlikely I could find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the complaint is late. It is also unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman