Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we do not consider the complainant has suffered any significant injustice because of fault by the Council. And we cannot achieve the outcome she is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council told her to submit objections to a planning application for a nursery school from different people at the same address. She says it told her it would only accept one objection from each address. She also complains the Council failed to tell her about an extension to the consultation date for the planning application.
2. Mrs X says she had to visit residents to tell them about their objections and the extended consultation. She says her driveway is regularly blocked and cars park on the pavement in her road and the stress of the situation has affected her health.
3. She wants the nursery school closed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We 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. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Following reports of breaches of planning control at a nursery school close to Mrs X’s home, the nursery submitted a retrospective planning application to regularise the breach.
8. I will not reconsider the Council’s decision to accept a retrospective planning application as this matter has already been considered by the Ombudsman.
9. Mrs X complains the Council told her to make multiple objections to the retrospective planning application but then advised it would only accept one objection per address. Mrs X says if she had not been told of this there may not have been enough objections to automatically send the application to the planning committee for a decision.
10. The Council’s website shows the application was considered by the planning committee. The planning officer’s report notes the Council received 65 representations from 11 different addresses.
11. The report details the relevant local and national planning policies, summarises the objections and explains why the planning officer recommended granting planning permission.
12. The minutes of the planning committee meeting show the planning officer presented the report, one person spoke to the committee in support of the application and one for the objectors. Following a discussion, the committee decided to approve the retrospective application with conditions.
13. When a local authority receives a planning application it must look at the development plan and material planning considerations to decide if the proposal is acceptable. Material considerations relate to the use and development of the land in the public interest and includes matters such as the impact on neighbouring properties and the relevant planning policies. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material considerations in determining a planning application.
14. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body for planning decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
15. In this case, I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the acceptability of the development, including the impact on neighbouring properties and the area, before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report referred to Mrs X’s objections and addressed her concerns.
16. I understand Mrs X is concerned that she was told to make multiple objections from the same address before being told the Council will only accept one per property. However, I cannot say she has suffered any significant injustice because of this as she was aware of the application and made her objections.
17. Mrs X says her driveway is regularly blocked and people park on the pavements etc. However, these are the actions of private individuals, not the actions of the Council. I understand she wants the nursery school closed; however, this is not something the Ombudsman can achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we do not consider that Mrs X has suffered significant personal injustice because of the Council’s actions. Nor can we achieve the outcome sought.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman