Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to consult neighbours about a certificate of lawfulness application. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mr X complain the Council did not consult them about a certificate of lawfulness application for a mobile home at a neighbouring property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. But 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered:
• information provided by Mr and Mr X.
• information about the application on the Council’s website.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I appreciate Mr and Mr X are very unhappy the Council did not consult them about the application and that it concluded the mobile home did not require planning permission.
6. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
7. There was no statutory requirement to consult neighbours about this kind of application. And the Council could not consider issues such as the aesthetics/design of the structure or its impact on neighbouring amenity. Rather, it was restricted to considering whether the proposal amounted to ‘development’ in planning/legal terms. It has explained why the information submitted with the application led it to conclude that the proposal did not require planning permission.
8. As such, I find there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council determined the application to justify starting an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman