Uttlesford District Council (21 011 176)

Statement Upheld Planning applications 29-Mar-2022

Summary: Mr B complained about the way the Council decided a planning application for development near his property. In particular he said the Council failed to properly consider the impact of the development on his amenity and failed to follow the Council’s planning guidance. We found the Council misrepresented Mr B’s property in the officer’s report which caused Mr B frustration and uncertainty. But we did not consider the fault affected the outcome of the planning application. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B and pay him £150.

Torbay Council (21 012 877)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 29-Mar-2022

Summary: Ms X complains the Council has refused to consider the planning breaches and misrepresentations of a neighbour whose development has impacted on her. We will not investigate the complaint because it is a late complaint and so falls outside our jurisdiction.

Darlington Borough Council (21 018 248)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 29-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with planning applications for a development near Mr X’s property. This is because the last planning decision was made by the Council in 2019 so this is a late complaint and there are no good reasons to investigate it now. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a recent ecology survey because the Council was not involved in this being carried out.

Chelmsford City Council (21 018 258)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 29-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action regarding his neighbour’s new windows, or request the neighbour to submit a retrospective planning application for the works. There is not enough evidence of Council fault in its decision-making process to warrant an investigation.

West Berkshire Council (20 004 358)

Statement Not upheld Enforcement 29-Mar-2022

Summary: Mr B complains that the Council failed to take appropriate action in respect of breaches of planning control relating to a nearby mobile home site. The Ombudsman has found no fault in the way the Council has decided to take no further action, so we cannot question the merits of that decision.

Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council (20 008 973)

Statement Not upheld Other 29-Mar-2022

Summary: We found no fault in how the Council publicised a planning application for development near Mrs X’s home.

Somerset West and Taunton Council (21 002 838)

Statement Upheld Planning applications 29-Mar-2022

Summary: Mrs B complains the Council failed to properly consider a planning application for floodlighting to a tennis court and will suffer from excessive levels of light intrusion and glare. We have found fault by the Council in its decision making process but consider the agreed action of an apology, £250 and an assessment of the impact of the floodlighting with any necessary mitigation is enough to provide a suitable remedy.

City of Doncaster Council (21 012 882)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 29-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council should adopt a green space within the residential development where the complainant lives. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in relation to the green space, and the delay in responding to the associated correspondence/complaint has not caused the complainant a significant injustice.

Guildford Borough Council (21 018 056)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 28-Mar-2022

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaints about his neighbour’s hedge. This is because he has already exercised his right of appeal to the Planning Inspector. We will also not investigate Mr X’s complaints about delays in the Council’s complaints process as any injustice to Mr X is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (21 012 225)

Statement Upheld Planning applications 28-Mar-2022

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a large storage facility on land near her home. Ms X said the new building is large and affects her amenity. We found fault because the wording of a planning policy document is unclear and ambiguous. In addition to an apology to Ms X for any confusion that may have been caused, we have recommended that the Council should review the document and correct it as necessary. It should also review its document checking processes to avoid similar faults in future.