The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not been caused significant injustice as a result of the alleged fault.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council dealt with a retrospective planning application. Mr X says his objections and concerns about the development were not property considered.
Mr X has also complained about how the Council dealt with his complaint and says there have been long delays.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with 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.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Mr X’s complaint has not completed the Council’s complaint process. However, Mr X asked the Council to consider his complaint under stage two of its complaint process some time ago. I am satisfied the Council has had a reasonable opportunity to respond and therefore I have considered his concerns.
My assessment
Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with a retrospective planning application. Mr X says the Council failed to consider his concerns about the development and the case officer did not respond to his correspondence.
However, even if I could say the Council was at fault in this regard, I do not consider Mr X has suffered any significant injustice as a result as the planning application was ultimately refused. Mr X also does not live near to the application site and therefore is unlikely to be significantly affected by the development.
Furthermore, the Council has recently received and approved an amended application for the development. Mr X also objected to the revised application and his concerns were addressed in the case officer’s report.
Mr X has complained about the Council’s complaint handling. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as complaint handling.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered significant injustice because of the alleged fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman