Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to attend a site meeting or discuss the complainants request for highway pre-planning application advice. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mr X, says the Council failed to respond to his further enquiries made during the pre-planning application advice process. It also refused to visit the site.
2. Mr X says because of the Council’s actions he had to engage a planning consultant. Its actions also caused him stress, anxiety, and delay.
3. He wants the Council to pay for the cost of the planning consultants.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X paid £53 for highways pre-planning application advice as he wanted to carry out work at his home.
8. The Council gave several objections to his proposed plans.
9. Mr X sought further information and asked for an Officer to meet him on site to discuss his proposal.
10. The Council declined to meet Mr X on site. It says a senior Officer reviewed the pre-application advice provided and was satisfied it was correct.
11. Mr X says there was nothing to say the Council would not attend the site when he paid for the advice.
12. I understand Mr X says because the Council refused to engage with him, or visit the site after it provided the advice, he had to engage a planning consultant. He believes the Council should pay the resulting fees he incurred.
13. Checks of the Council’s website show nothing to confirm it will or will not carry out site visits in connection with pre-planning advice applications.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen sufficient evidence to show the Council was at fault because it decided not to visit the site or engage with Mr X after it had provided the pre-planning application advice. It is for the Council to decided whether it has enough information to provide the advice which, in any event, is non-binding.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman