The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have used the right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate for non-determination of an application.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, says the Council took eight months to determine her planning application and did not adhere to agreed extensions of time.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal, or could have appealed, to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b)) The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector can consider appeals about: delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission, or a decision to refuse planning permission.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council, which consisted of their complaint correspondence.
I also considered our Assessment Code.
My assessment
The restriction detailed in paragraphs 2 and 3 above applies to Mrs X’s complaint. This is because she could have appealed to the Planning Inspectorate if she was unhappy with the time it was taking to determine the application. I see no reasons why Mrs X should not be expected to have used this right of appeal, so the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and will not be investigated.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect her to have used the right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman