Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of planning matters relating to a development in Ms X’s area. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council misinterpreted national and local planning policies in relation to a planning application for development in a Conservation Area and about the way the application was dealt with by the Council. She says concerns raised were not properly considered or taken seriously and the planning permission granted should be revoked.

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, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. I gave the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what she said.

Back to top

My assessment

7. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants disagree. We cannot question decisions taken by councils if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. While Ms X may not agree with the decision taken by the Council in relation to the application in question, I have seen no evidence to suggest fault affected the outcome.
8. Ms X says it is not true to say that a development of the size and nature of that approved by the Council “will not erode the character of the site” and will “not adversely affect the Conservation Area”. However, this is a judgement for officers to make and we cannot review the merits of it. Moreover, the outcome Ms X seeks for her complaint for the revocation of the planning permission is not one we can achieve.
9. In responding to my draft decision Ms X has repeated her position that she does not agree with the Council’s view that the development “will not erode the character of the site” and will “not adversely affect the Conservation Area”. Ms X refers to our factsheet, Complaints about conservation areas. However, this states that while councils must give special attention to whether it believes the planned development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area, this does not mean an area must remain unchanged and the courts have decided development proposals will preserve or enhance the character of an area provided they do not cause demonstrable harm to it. That the Council has made a decision with which Ms X disagrees, is not evidence that it has not followed national and local policies or that there has been fault which affected the outcome of the application.
10. Ms X also refers to contradictory arboricultural advice over six planning applications and the loss of an amenity value tree. However, the Council adequately addressed this matter in its response to Ms X's complaint and again it was for officers to exercise their professional judgement on the value of the tree.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms 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