Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled a planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation, and an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council did not follow proper processes when it decided to grant planning permission for a development near his home. He says this caused him distress and he spent a lot of time and effort pursuing his complaint. Mr X wants the Council to acknowledge its failings, apologise, and pay him a financial remedy.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

3. 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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained the Council did not properly consult with residents or publicise a planning application. This part of the complaint has already been considered by the Ombudsman. Where the Ombudsman has already decided not to investigate, we will not reconsider this as further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
7. Mr X further complained the Council did not consider his comments at the planning committee meeting. The Council responded to Mr X about this part of his complaint. It said Mr X’s comments were taken into consideration in the Officer’s report, and his concerns were properly addressed there and in the decision statement. The Council imposed conditions when it granted planning permission to mitigate the concerns of local residents. We could not add anything further to the Council’s response and an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve anything more.
8. I understand Mr X raised a number of concerns about why he felt the development was not suitable. However, I am satisfied the Council properly considered concerns of local residents and Mr X when it decided to grant planning permission. Where we are unlikely to find fault in how the Council made its decision, we will not question the outcome or criticise it.
9. Mr X further complained about the Council’s complaint handling. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman