Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her planning application. She says the Council did not clearly tell her what information was needed to validate the application. As a result, she had to resubmit it and incurred additional costs.

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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. When a planning authority receives an application, it must first validate it. To do so, a council will need to ensure it has received the necessary information and application fee. There will be national information requirements such as plans and ownership certificates. Councils will also have their own local requirements for information.
6. Miss X submitted an incomplete planning application. Three weeks later, the Council told her it could not validate the application and explained what information was missing. The Council chased Miss X’s agent again as it did not receive the requested information. A month later, Miss X withdrew the application and the Council refunded the planning application fee.
7. Miss X later submitted a new planning application which included the required information. The Council validated the new application two days later and notified the relevant statutory consultees including the Council’s Drainage Authority. The Drainage Authority objected to the proposals saying there was an unsatisfactory report and requested land drainage consents. The Council waited for extra information from Miss X or her agent. Two months later, Miss X withdrew the planning application.
8. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council handled the validation process, or to support Miss X’s account of what happened. The Council told Miss X what information was missing from the first application, gave her time to provide it, and refunded the application fee when she withdrew. The Council was entitled to decide the application could not be validated until all the required information had been received. Responsibility for submitting a complete application rested with Miss X and her agent.
9. There is also not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s handling of the consultation process. The drainage authority is a statutory consultee and operates independently of the Council’s planning department. It is entitled to object to the planning proposal where necessary land drainage consents or other information are missing. As the Council has explained, that is separate to the handling of the planning application.
10. Miss X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman