Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting planning permission for a change in height of the fence at a site next to the complainant. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council determined the application.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has given no reason for allowing changes to the original plans for the development, and says it has taken away the privacy he previously enjoyed.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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 two planning applications for the site, 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 about the change to the fence.
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. I consider there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council determined the application, so we will not start an investigation. In reaching this view, I am mindful that;
• the Council visited the application site and Mr X’s land.
• Mr X’s objections are summarised in the delegated officer report.
• the report goes on to consider the impact of the changes on Mr X’s amenity.
• the Council was entitled to reach its own professional judgement on whether the proposal was acceptable, even if Mr X disagrees with the decision reached.

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 Council determined the application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman