Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and the pre-application planning advice it provided. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. It is unlikely we would find fault and the complainant has not suffered significant injustice in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained on behalf of Ms Y about how the Council dealt with her planning application and the pre-application advice it provided. Mr X says there were delays and the Council provided contradictory advice. Mr X also says the Council failed to properly communicate with Ms Y and imposed unreasonable planning conditions.

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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
4. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• Delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• A decision to refuse planning permission
• Conditions placed on planning permission
• A planning enforcement notice.

5. 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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms Y could have appealed to the Planning Inspector for non-determination if she was unhappy with how long the Council was taking to determine her application. She also could have appealed if she disagreed with the planning conditions the Council placed on the planning permission. I consider it would have been reasonable for Ms Y to use her right of appeal, and the Ombudsman will not usually investigate when someone had the right to appeal.
8. Mr X has raised concerns about the pre-application planning advice Ms Y received and says she was led to believe the application would be straight forward and supported. Mr X says Ms Y sold her home and purchased a new property based on this advice. However, the Council has explained why the application submitted did not follow the advice provided and Ms Y was informed that additional information would be needed if a planning application was submitted. Councils are also not bound by the advice provided and positive pre-application advice is not a guarantee that planning permission will be given or that permission will be granted without the need for further information or conditions.
9. Mr X has also complained about how the Council handled personal information and how it responded to a Subject Access Request. However, Ms Y can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office as it is the appropriate body to deal with complaints about these matters.
10. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with the complaint and says the Council failed to properly communicate with Ms Y about the application. However, I do not consider the injustice suffered by Ms Y because of these matters significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms Y’s complaint because she had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. It is unlikely we would find fault with how the Council dealt with Ms Y’s pre-application advice request and she has not suffered significant injustice because of any fault with how the Council communicated with her and dealt with her complaints.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman