Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s response to consultation about a planning application. This is because the response did not cause Mr X significant injustice. The decision about whether to grant planning permission for the proposal rests with the Planning Inspectorate.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s response to consultation about a planning application handled by the local planning authority (LPA).

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council, as local highway authority, is a statutory consultee for planning applications. However the decision about whether to grant planning permission rests with the LPA.
5. The LPA decided to refuse the application Mr X refers to in his complaint and the matter is now with the Planning Inspectorate to consider the applicant’s appeal. We could not therefore say that the Council’s response to the LPA’s consultation on the application caused Mr X significant injustice as it has no control over firstly the LPA’s decision and now the decision by the Planning Inspectorate.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council’s response to the LPA’s consultation did not cause Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman