Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to provide refunds following the withdrawal of the complainant's planning applications. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner about the first application and, in any event, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has refused to refund the fees for her two planning applications, which she says were not registered and were then withdrawn.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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 insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. And we cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• information provided by Ms X and the Council, which included their complaint correspondence.
• information about the planning applications, as available on the Council’s website.
• information about the planning application fees, as available on the Council’s website.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The time restriction detailed in paragraph 4 above would apply to Ms X’s request for a refund of her first application fee. This is because that application was withdrawn in August 2022, yet Ms X did not contact the Ombudsman until January 2026. I see no good reasons why Ms X could not have contacted us sooner if she felt she was entitled to a refund. So, we will not exercise discretion to investigate this late part of the complaint now.
7. And even if the time restriction did not apply, I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify starting an investigation. This is because a refund (minus an administration fee) only applies where an application is withdrawn post‑registration, but prior to validation. For both of Ms X’s applications, they were withdrawn after the applications had been validated and considered by a planning officer.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect her to have contacted us sooner and, in any case, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman