Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting planning permission for a development which the complainant says encroaches onto his property. There is insufficient evidence that fault by the Council has directly caused a significant injustice to the complainant.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has granted planning permission for his neighbour to build an extension on a wall he owns. Mr X says the plans depicted it as a shared wall, when in fact it is entirely on his property, and he thinks the Council should have identified this when determining the application.
2. Mr X is also concerned that water run-off from the extension will damage his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

4. With regard to the first bullet point, we can consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X.
• information about the planning application, as available on the Council’s website.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. I appreciate Mr X is unhappy the Council has granted planning permission for an extension which he says is designed to be built on a wall he owns.
7. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a Council decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decision, and we consider if any fault we may find is likely to have affected the outcome or caused the complainant a significant injustice. In other words, we will only pursue a complaint if there is clear evidence of fault in the way a decision was made which, but for that fault, is likely to have led to a different decision or a more positive outcome for the complainant.
8. I find there is insufficient evidence that fault by the Council has directly caused Mr X a significant injustice, so we will not start an investigation. In reaching this view, I am mindful that:
• when a council registers a planning application it does not make checks against Land Registry records; instead, it takes the information submitted by the applicant on face value.
• Mr X did not raise any concerns about the ownership of the wall during the Council’s determination of the application.
• if the applicant had identified that the wall was in Mr X’s ownership, and served the corresponding certificate on him, it seems to me that the planning application is still likely to have been approved.
• the granting of planning permission does not override any ownership rights Mr X has over the wall. The defence of such ownership rights would be a private, civil matter, if the neighbour tries to implement the planning permission in the future.
• planning is concerned with land use in the public interest. Therefore, it is not the Council’s role to adjudicate in a boundary dispute; again, this is a civil matter.
• If the guttering/drainage arrangement for surface-water runoff causes damage to Mr X’s property, then that would also be a private, civil matter between Mr X and the neighbour.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence that fault by the Council has directly caused Mr X a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman