The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of a Trust, about the way the Council dealt with a planning application. We will not investigate this complaint because we cannot say with certainty that any significant injustice was caused by the alleged fault.
The complaint
Mr X complains on behalf of a Trust, about the way the Council dealt with a planning application.
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 the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
The complainant provided comments on a draft of this decision.
My assessment
Mr X says that the Council Planning Officer should have passed the consideration of a planning application to the Planning Committee.
The Ombudsman would not investigate this complaint because, if fault was found and it was concluded that the planning application should have been considered by the Planning Committee, he could not say with certainty that the decision would have been different. Unless he could so conclude, no injustice is caused to Mr X by that alleged fault. Any injustice is therefore speculative.
In the absence of significant injustice, the Ombudsman would not investigate a complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because any injustice claimed is speculative.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman