The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s processing and decision to approve a planning application for the complainant’s neighbour. I consider it is unlikely that further investigation will lead to a different outcome.
The complaint
The complainant, I shall call Mr X, says the Council failed to inform him about his neighbour’s planning application. He says he was therefore denied his opportunity to object to the proposal on the grounds it is inappropriate development in the green belt.
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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (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.
My assessment
The Council received a planning application from Mr X’s neighbours to remove an existing garage and conservatory. And for the erection of a single storey side extension and rear extension to form a kitchen, utility room, study, and home gym.
The Council says it issued letters for printing to the properties neighbouring the site, notifying them of the proposal. However, Mr X says he did not receive a letter.
I cannot know why Mr X did not receive the Council’s letter. However, in response to the complaint, the Council says its records show issued them for printing. The Council is not required to provide proof of postage. The Council has also offered to hand deliver a notification letter, should the neighbour make any applications to amend the planning permission. I consider that further investigation on this point is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
The planning officer prepared a report on the proposed scheme. This refers to the location in the green belt and to the Council policies on development within the green belt.
It was for the planning officer to balance both national and local policy and decide to recommend an application for approval or not. We must consider whether there was fault in how the Council did this, not whether the decision was right or wrong. Without fault in the decision-making process, we cannot question the decision itself.
Mr X says he could not object about what he considers is inappropriate development in the green belt. However, the planning officer’s report lays out what legislation has applied to the case, including policies on the green belt. It also explains why the officer recommended the application for approval. The officer decided the scheme did not represent a disproportionate addition to the neighbour’s property. Nor would it detract from the visual amenity of the surrounding areas. Also, as the proposal was to replace existing buildings, the net increase in floor space is only about 25sqm. This is a professional judgement and decision the officer is entitled to make.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because I cannot know why he did not receive the Council’s letter advising him of his neighbour’s planning application. Also, the planning officer’s report shows the Council considered the location of the development within the green belt and the relevant planning policies. I consider it is therefore unlikely that further investigation will lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman