Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application before granting planning permission. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council’s plans panel meeting was misled and the Council ignored residents and ward councillors about a planning application.
2. He specifically says a bridge access point is unfit for purpose and there are elements of the application that do not meet many specifications and requirements.
3. Mr X wants the Council to re-think how it runs its plans panel meetings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

6. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The general power to control development and use of land is set out in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Permission is necessary for any development or change of use of land and may be granted by a Local Planning Authority (LPA). Or deemed to be permitted if it falls within the limits set out in Permitted Development regulations.
10. All decisions on planning applications must be made according to the Council’s local development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The National Planning Policy Framework does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision-making. It constitutes guidance in drawing up plans and is a material consideration in deciding applications.
11. Material considerations relate to the use and development of land in the public interest, and not to private considerations. Material considerations include issues such as overlooking, traffic generation and noise.
12. Local opposition or support for a proposal is not in itself a ground for refusing or granting planning permission unless it is founded on valid material planning reasons. General planning policies may pull in different directions, for example, in promoting residential development and protecting residential amenities. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material consideration in deciding a planning application.
13. Councils have a statutory duty to publicise applications and to consider representations (either for or against the application) which people make. But that is not the same as consulting with the public.
14. In 2019 the Council approved an outline planning application for 67 new properties close to Mr X’s home. The Council publicised the application and Mr X and others objected.
15. The law says complaints to the Ombudsman must be made within twelve months of the person becoming aware of the cause of the complaint. Mr X spoke at the plans panel meeting and was aware that outline planning permission was granted in 2019. I have seen no reason why he could not have complained to us much sooner if he had concerns about the way the planning meeting was run. Therefore any complaint about the actions of the plans panel meeting in 2019 is too late.
16. In 2023 the plans panel considered the reserved matters application for the site. This covered the layout, scale, appearance, and landscaping. All other matters were decided at the outline application stage, including the operation of the bridge to the site.
17. The Ombudsman looks for procedural fault in how the Council came to its decision, we are not an appeal body. We cannot consider the merits of the decisions reached or the professional judgement of the decision makers, without evidence of procedural fault.
18. The planning officer’s report provides an assessment of the proposal. From the information I have seen, I am satisfied the Council followed the proper process before deciding to approve the planning application under its scheme of delegation.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any complaint about the outline planning permission granted in 2019 is too late. And we have not seen evidence of fault in the way the Council plans panel meeting dealt with the reserved matters application in 2023.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman