Reading Borough Council (25 019 411)
Category : Planning > Planning applications
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 13 Apr 2026
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the time taken by the Council to discharge a planning condition. Mr X has had an alternative remedy available by way of an appeal to the Planning Inspector it would have been reasonable to use.
The complaint
- Mr X says unreasonable delay by the Council in discharging a planning condition led to the expiry of planning permission and extra costs
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
- The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mr X received a grant of planning permission in 2021 for a development. The permission lasted for three years and contained conditions that needed to be discharged before development could commence.
- Mr X applied in 2024 for the Council to discharge the conditions. One of them was not discharged, and Mr X made a second application. The second application was not discharged before the planning permission lapsed.
- Both a refusal to discharge a planning condition and a delay beyond a deadline in deciding a discharge application carry rights of appeal to the Planning Inspector. It would have been reasonable for Mr X to use those rights. That him doing so might have carried matters beyond the three-year expiry date of the earlier planning permission is not relevant as the Council was not responsible for the date the discharge application was received.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he had an alternative remedy available for any refusal of planning permission or delay in deciding an application it would have been reasonable to use.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman