Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered prior approval applications. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to consider the impact of a proposed development on highway safety when it considered two prior approval applications.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Between permitted development, which does not require planning permission, and a full planning application, there is a third process called prior approval. This applies where the development is, in principle, permitted development but the council needs to authorise certain elements of the work.
6. The prior approval process allows local planning authorities to assess the impact of the proposed development on various issues, including sitting and appearance.
7. Mr X says the Council failed to properly consider the impact of the proposals on the highway. However, the application was to add floors to the top of an apartment block. No changes to the highway or parking arrangements were proposed.
8. From the information I have seen, I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the application against the relevant criteria in the General Permitted Development Order.
9. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to give consent for the development. However, it was entitled to use its professional judgement and the case officer’s report explains why the proposal is acceptable and how it complies with the necessary requirements. The Ombudsman cannot question the Council’s decision unless there was fault in the way the decision was made. As the Council properly considered the application, it is unlikely we could find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with the prior approval applications.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman