LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: There was no fault in the Council’s decisions or actions around preventing Mrs X’s garden flooding. However, the Council was at fault for not updating Mrs X as it said it would. We are satisfied the Council has remedied the injustice caused by this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about comments published on the Council’s website about a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a lack of planning enforcement action against a change of use for a property close to the complainant’s home. The Council has sought a retrospective planning application, and the complainants have put in objections. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

Summary: Mrs B complained that the Council had not considered the impact on residents when it approved an application for a phone mast. She says the mast is highly visible and has significantly impacted on her enjoyment of her garden. There was no fault by the Council in how it approved the mast.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaints about the conduct of Councillors or the Council’s handling of allegations about her partner because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for an extension to her neighbour’s property. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s retrospective claim for housing benefit made without the complainant’s knowledge and delay in responding to the complaint. We do not consider Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice because of the Council’s actions. And we consider an apology for the delay in responding to the complainant is a suitable remedy to this part of the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a Planning Contravention Notice to the complainant. This is primarily because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s handling of the enforcement case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that no breach of planning control is taking place at a children’s home in the village where the complainant lives. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council informing Mr X that it would take further action against him if he persists in harassing its officers. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Summary: Mr and Mrs M complain about the Council's decision to approve a planning application for a development next to their home and that it failed to take enforcement action promptly. We have found fault but this did not cause injustice to Mr and Mrs M. The Council has now changed the information it publishes about its planning decisions.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council has delayed deciding his planning application. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the planning inspector.