Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the delay in dealing with a planning application. We do not consider the complainant has suffered enough personal injustice to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the length of time the Council has taken to consider a retrospective planning application for the change of use of land near his home. Mr X says the delay has caused him and other residents significant stress and anxiety. Mr X wants the Council to refuse planning permission and proceed to enforcement.

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:

• 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))

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. Mr X complains about the time the Council has taken to determine a planning application. However, the administrative function when dealing with a planning application is between the applicant and the Council as Local Planning Authority. Delay in the decision-making process is a matter between the applicant and the Council. It is not a fault in a service which Mr X or other parties received from the Council.
6. Local planning authorities have a duty under the National Planning Policy Framework, which is guidance from national government, to work proactively with applicants to secure the best possible planning outcomes for their areas. Sometimes that requires negotiations and amendments to proposals, taking longer than more straightforward matters. It is for the Council and the applicant to negotiate on the application as they see fit, in line with the relevant guidance. Mr X is not the applicant in this planning application and so I cannot find enough evidence of significant personal injustice caused to Mr X by this delay.
7. Furthermore, the land subject to the planning application is some distance from Mr X’s property meaning no significant day to day impact on Mr X. I understand the time taken for the Council to issue a decision on the application caused Mr X and others stress and anxiety however I cannot find enough evidence of significant personal injustice to Mr X to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we do not consider he has suffered sufficient personal injustice because of the Council’s actions.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman