The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a development in its area. There are no wider public interest reasons that justify an investigation and Mr X has not been caused a personal injustice as a result of the Council’s actions.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council has granted planning permission for a large development which will have a detrimental impact on environment in the Council’s area. Mr X says the Council failed to identify operations within the development and failed to consider the environmental impacts or carry out a proper public consultation.
Mr X says the Council’s planning committee were going to refuse permission but this decision was later changed by Council officers.
Mr X says the development will cause harmful emissions and should be shut down by the Council.
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 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 the complainant and the Council. I have also considered information about the planning application on the Council’s website.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
We must consider whether there are any public interest reasons which justify an investigation.
The Council’s planning committee did not refuse planning permission for the development. The committee deferred its decision pending further consultation and an air quality report.
The Council then granted planning permission. The decision was made at a senior level within the Council in consultation with members. The Council received no responses to the further consultation and the air quality report said that emissions were not expected to be “significant” based on modelling.
It is unlikely we would find fault with the way the Council reached its decision. The decision was taken in line with the Council’s constitution in consultation with members. The air quality report also found that emissions from the site would not be significant and so I cannot see any wider public interest reasons to investigate this complaint.
Mr X does not live near the development and so he has not been caused a personal injustice as a result of the actions of the Council.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there are no wider public interest reasons for us to investigate and Mr X has not been caused a personal injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman