Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s neighbour’s planning application and its decision to grant permission. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not consider all the points he had raised in his objections to his neighbour’s planning application, disregarded its own guidance without providing any supporting rationale and made decisions which were unprecedented and went against previous decisions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. We 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)
3. 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s response to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X submitted objections to his neighbour’s planning application but the Council decided to grant permission. The officer report for the application noted that the proposal did not meet the 45 degree guidance test but concluded the impact would be minor and did not warrant a reason for refusal on this basis.
7. Mr X complained to the Council about its handling of the application and its decision. It responded to the various points he raised but did not uphold his complaint, finding only minor fault because the officer report had failed to make specific reference to the drainage concerns Mr X had raised in his objections. However, it satisfied itself that this omission would not have materially affected the decision.
8. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal and review the merits of decisions taken by councils and their officers using their professional judgement. We cannot question decisions councils make if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. While Mr X may be disappointed with the decisions made by the Council, there is no evidence to suggest fault affected them and we will not consider the complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman