Rossendale Borough Council (25 014 840)
Category : Planning > Planning applications
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 28 Apr 2026
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a planning committee meeting that approved an application to erect a temporary meteorological mast. There is not enough evidence of personal injustice to Mr X to warrant our further involvement.
The complaint
- Mr X says the Council failed to conduct a planning meeting properly that approved an application to erect a temporary meteorological mast.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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:
- any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
- any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council and checked the application documents on the Council’s website.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mr X’s home is several kilometres from the mast site, though the hill on which it stands means it would be visible from his property, as its 91-metre height and the stay cables would catch the sunlight at least. However, the effect on a person’s view is not a relevant planning matter a planning authority should consider. Investigation by us would be unlikely to find Mr X’s concern over the effect of the development and the way the committee considered the application to be sufficient injustice to warrant our involvement.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because as there is not enough evidence of personal injustice to him from the Council’s actions to warrant our further involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman