Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council applied its planning policies. We have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has failed to apply its planning policies in a consistent way.

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 Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In 2023, the Council granted planning permission for Ms X’s neighbour to demolish their garage and extend their property.
6. In response to an investigation into a breach of planning control, the neighbour applied for retrospective permission for a gate and fencing to their front and rear gardens and raised levels to the back garden.
7. The planning officer’s report shows the Council considered the proposal, the objections received and the impact of the development on neighbouring properties, including Ms X’s home.
8. The Officer decided the work was acceptable and the Council granted planning permission.
9. The neighbour then applied for permission to change the original permission granted in 2023, by changing the finish of the extension from brick to white render.
10. The Council refused this application as it considered the white render would be out of character with the surrounding area.
11. Another application was made by the neighbour. This was again to change the original 2023 permission by changing the finish to the property and to alter the shape of a window. The proposed finish was mainly brick with sections of white render and grey panels.
12. The planning officer’s report details the proposal, the objections received and the relevant local and national planning policy. The Council decided to grant planning permission because it considers the finish materials are consistent with the street scene as most of the render will be to the rear of the property and side section. The Council considered this acceptable.
13. When planning authorities receive planning applications, they must consider relevant planning matters in reaching a decision. These may be obvious or be raised by members of the public who comment on the applications. The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 specifies a range of relevant planning matters. Among these are the possible effects on the amenity of neighbours. This can be in terms of size, scale, light pollution, odour, loss of privacy and others. While the planning authority must consider all those that are relevant, it has discretion about what weight to give to them. The Ombudsman’s role is only to consider whether the planning authority acted correctly by considering relevant planning matters, not to reach her own view of them where there is no fault.
14. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is the Council’s role as local planning authority, to reach a judgement about whether a development is acceptable after consideration of local and national planning polices; comments from statutory consultees and objections/representations from people affected by the decision.
15. The evidence strongly suggests that this is what has happened in this case and therefore the Ombudsman would be unlikely to find that there had been fault if she investigated.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman