Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence to show any fault by the Council wrongly affected its decision to grant planning permission. The Council has explained in detail the reasons it considers the development acceptable and I have seen no basis for us to question its judgement on the issue.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of a planning application. He says the Council incorrectly stated the development would have no harmful impact on his property as it had wrongly assumed his facing windows served ‘non-habitable’ rooms. He is also unhappy the Council allowed the applicant to make changes to the plans and carry out unauthorised development without taking formal enforcement action. He is concerned about the impact of the approved development on his property and wants the Council to change the design.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

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. The Council acknowledges it wrongly stated Mr X’s facing windows served rooms which were ‘non-habitable’ and not therefore significantly affected by the development, but it has clearly and rationally explained the reasons this did not affect its decision to grant planning permission and I have seen no basis for us to question this.
6. The Council has also explained the reasons it did not reconsult following minor changes to the plans as part of the application process, and for not taking formal enforcement action for minor breaches of the approved plans. While I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the Council’s reasons I have seen no evidence of fault in its approach and we cannot therefore criticise it.
7. I acknowledge Mr X is concerned about the development and its impact on his property, but the Council must take into account the impact from the current approved use of the site and consider only whether the changes applied for will have such harmful impact on Mr X’s property that it warrants refusal. This is a matter of professional judgement for council officers and the law does not allow us to find fault simply because someone disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response. The Council has acknowledged its statement about Mr X’s windows was inaccurate but has explained the reasons this did not affect the decision. We cannot in any event say the Council must revoke the planning permission or make changes to the approved plans.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman