Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response in its role as a statutory consultee on a planning application. We do not consider the complainant has suffered a sufficient personal injustice which warrants an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refused to provide a substantive response to his enquiry about its statutory consultee response to the local planning authority (LPA).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X .
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council, in its role as local highway authority, is a statutory consultee on planning applications received by the LPA.
6. The LPA asked the Council to comment on a planning application it had received for a site near Mr X’s home.
7. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s response to the consultation. He asked the Council to justify its comments and provide more information.
8. The Council confirms that planning application is still live. It says it will not correspond with third parties who are neither the planning applicant nor the LPA. It directed Mr X to the LPA for a response to questions about the planning process.
9. I understand Mr X believes the Council is responsible for a delay in the LPA making a decision on the planning application. However, the Council is not required to engage in correspondence with third parties in its role as statutory consultee. I have seen no evidence to show the Council’s comments have caused any delay in the planning process. The LPA can extend its decision-making period for planning applications with the agreement of the applicant. Third parties such as Mr X have no rights in this regard.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. I understand Mr X and his family have found the fact a neighbouring business has put in a planning application stressful. However, the application has yet been determined. Also the LPA may decide not to approve it. Therefore I do not consider Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice which justifies an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman