Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider the late complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council approved a planning application without properly considering the effect on the neighbouring properties or wildlife in the area.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)).
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In 2023, the Council approved a planning application for a development near Mrs X’s home.
8. Mrs X complains the impact of the development was not properly considered by the Council when deciding to approve the planning application. Mrs X says there were also inaccuracies in the planning officer’s description of the development.
9. I consider Mrs X’s complaint about the decision to grant planning approval late. A complaint is late if it has taken someone more than 12 months to complain to the Ombudsman. The planning application was approved in 2023, but Mrs X did not complain to the Ombudsman until 2025. I have considered whether to exercise our discretion to investigate this part of the complaint, but I have seen no good reasons to do so. In the circumstances, I consider it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to bring the complaint to us sooner.
10. Even if the complaint were not late, we would not investigate. The courts made it clear that officer reports:
• do not need to include every possible planning consideration, but just the principal controversial issues
• do not need to be perfect, as their intended audience are the parties to the application (the council and the applicant) who are well experienced of the issues; and
• should not be subject to hypercritical scrutiny, and do not merit challenge unless their overall effect is to significantly mislead the decision maker on the key material issues.
11. I have read the Case Officer’s report. It set out the reasons for the Council’s decision and the relevant considerations, including the impact on neighbouring properties and wildlife. I have not found evidence the report significantly mislead the decision maker.
12. We are not a planning appeal body, and we cannot overturn the Council’s decision. We look at how the Council made its decision and whether there was any flaw in that decision-making. If there was no fault in the Council’s decision-making, we cannot question it.
13. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council has reached its decision to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider the late complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman