Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council approving a planning application at a site next to a property which the complainant later purchased. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council assessed the application.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council approving a planning application at a site next to a property he subsequently purchased.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not directly caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

3. With regard to the first bullet point above, we can consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included their complaint correspondence.
• information about the planning application, as available on the Council’s website.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I appreciate Mr X is very unhappy to have discovered a site next to a property he purchased already had planning permission for building works.
6. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
7. Here, I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the application was determined, so we will not start investigation. In reaching this view, I am mindful that:
• the case officer visited the application site as well as the property which Mr X subsequently purchased.
• the delegated report summarises the objections received about the application, and goes on to consider the impact of the proposal on the amenity of neighbouring properties.
• the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide the proposal was acceptable on balance.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the application was determined.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman