Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council processed a planning application. This is because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for her neighbour’s extension.

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 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

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. We are 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.
6. Mrs X’s neighbour put in two planning applications to extend their home. The Council publicised both applications. Mrs X objected and her objections were summarised and considered in the planning officer’s reports on the schemes.
7. There is no limit on the number of applications a person can make. The Council must consider all valid planning applications that it receives.
8. The Council, as Local Planning Authority, must publicise the planning applications it receives. Depending on the nature of the development, publication may be by newspaper advertisement and/or site notice and/or neighbour notification (The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995). The notice will invite ‘representations’ for or against the application and explain how those representations may be made. The opportunity to make representations is not the same as a consultation. The authority must consider all material representations it receives but officers will not enter a dialogue with members of the public who have objected to a planning application.
9. There is no evidence to suggest the Council failed to publicise the applications or consider Mrs X’s objections. Having considered the applications, the Council granted planning permission for both schemes. It is up to the neighbour as to which scheme they decided to build. If the build does not follow either planning permission, Mrs X can report a breach of planning control for the Council to consider.
10. Mrs X says the development means her garage will be demolished. Granting planning permission does not give her neighbour rights over Mrs X’s property. Any disputes over land or boundaries are civil matters and not material planning considerations.
11. The Council confirmed daylight/sunlight reports necessary where there is an adverse impact arising from a breach of the 45-degree line. It is satisfied in this case there is no adverse impact and therefore no daylight/sunlight reports were required.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with her neighbour’s planning applications.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman