Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council decided to buy a property and process an application for its change of use to a children’s home. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. Also we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to carry out a location risk assessment or consult the police and safeguarding boards before it bought a house in the road where he lives.
2. Mr X also complains the Council failed to follow the correct process when it applied for planning permission to change the use of the house from a residential home to a residential children’s home for up to five children.
3. He wants the planning permission revoked and an internal review carried out.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. I have also viewed the webcast of the Planning and Highways Regulation Committee where the planning application was discussed.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Purchase of the property

7. In 2022, the Council’s Cabinet delegated the authority to buy suitable properties and apply for the necessary planning permissions to the Chief Executive.
8. The Council confirms a location assessment was carried out before the Council made on offer on the house in the road where Mr X lives.
9. I have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council proceeded with the purchase of the property.

The planning process

10. Planning controls the design, location and appearance of development and its impact on public amenity. Planning controls are not designed to protect private rights or interests. The Council may grant planning permission with conditions to control the use or development of land.
11. Local Planning Authorities must consider each application it receives on its own merits and decide it in line with their local planning policies, unless material considerations suggest otherwise. Material considerations concern the use and development of land in the public interest and include issues such as overlooking, traffic generation and noise. People’s comments on planning and land use issues linked to development proposals will be material considerations. Councils must take such comments into account but do not have to agree with those comments.
12. The Council applied for planning permission to change the use of the house to a children’s home. It publicised the application according to the statutory requirements. Mr X and others objected to the application.
13. The Planning Officer’s report summarised the objections received. It also detailed the relevant planning law and the comments from statutory consultees. The Officer outlined why they considered the change of use proposal to be acceptable.
14. The Council’s relevant local Area Committee decided to defer the application for a decision by the Planning and Highways Regulation Committee.
15. Members of the Planning and Highways Regulation Committee visited the application site.
16. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council and believes it failed to consider parking standards, traffic congestion, air quality and waste management.
17. However, the webcast of the meeting shows the application was discussed by the Committee with resident’s concerns discussed. Traffic and parking were clearly considered and a condition requiring the drive to be widened to allow more off-road parking was imposed. A condition ensuring no more than five children are to live at the property was also included. The site is not within an air quality management zone and the Council confirmed there will be no changes to waste management arrangements.
18. It is clear from the webcast the Committee was fully aware of what was being proposed before it decided to grant conditional approval.
19. Mr X wants the planning permission withdrawn. This is not something the Ombudsman can achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

20. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation. And we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman