Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his planning applications. This is because Mr X used his right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. We are unlikely to find fault in how the Council handled Mr X’s objections to his neighbour’s planning application.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has not adhered to its policy and has been biased and inconsistent in its planning decisions. He says he submitted a similar planning application to his neighbour and theirs was approved but his was rejected. He says this and the significant administrative delays by the Council have caused him financial loss.
2. Mr X says he submitted objections to his neighbour’s extension which the Council failed to consider. He says the extension has negatively impacted his accessibility and amenity to his property. Mr X wants the Council to review its decision on his planning application, provide transparent explanations for all the planning decisions and provide him with compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
5. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• Delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• A decision to refuse planning permission
• Conditions placed on planning permission
• A planning enforcement notice.

6. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
7. We 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)
8. We cannot find that an organisation has breached the Equality Act. However, we can find an organisation at fault for failing to take account of its duties under the Equality Act.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
10. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

11. Mr X appealed to the Planning Inspector about the Council’s decisions not to approve his planning applications. The law therefore prohibits us from investigating any complaint about its decisions or the way they were reached.
12. Mr X was unhappy with the Councils delay making its decision on his planning applications. I consider it would have been reasonable for Mr X to have appealed to the Planning Inspector for non-determination.
13. Mr X complained the Council discriminated against him which influenced its decision to delay and refuse his application. It is not our role to decide if a council has discriminated against someone or if the Equality Act has been breached. These are legal matters only the courts can determine.
14. Mr X complained the Council did not consider the objections he raised about his neighbour’s planning application. 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 the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
15. The Council explained to Mr X that each application is assessed on its individual merits. Its planning report shows it considered the objections raised by Mr X and addressed his concerns in its report. I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the acceptability of the development and it was entitled to use its professional judgement. Therefore, it is unlikely we would find fault with its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has used his right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. We are also unlikely to find fault in how the Council handled his objections to his neighbour’s planning application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman