Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has used their right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. The complainant has not suffered significant injustice in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his planning application. He says there were long delays, and the planning officer misled the planning committee.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• 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

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his planning application and says there were long delays. However, Mr X has appealed to the Planning Inspector against the non-determination of the application. The Ombudsman cannot investigate matters where someone has used their appeal right. This is the case even if the appeal will not address all the issues complained about.
7. Mr X has also complained about the Council’s planning committee meeting. He says the planning officer misled the committee members and provided an untrue explanation for the application delays. However, I do not consider Mr X has suffered any significant injustice because of the alleged fault. Mr X appealed to the Planning Inspector before the committee meeting. Although members agreed with the officer’s recommendation to refuse planning permission, the application will ultimately be determined by the Inspector, not the planning committee.
8. Mr X believes the incorrect information may impact the planning applications he submits in the future. However, as it is not yet known what may or may not happen on any possible future applications, the claimed injustice is speculative.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has used his right to appeal to the Planning Inspector. Mr X has not suffered significant injustice in relation to the remaining issues complained about.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman