The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. The Council has already upheld the complaint and agreed to remedy the complainant’s injustice. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would therefore not be proportionate.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, has complained about how the Council dealt with her neighbour’s planning application. Mrs X says the Council failed to consider her objections and did not refer the application to its planning committee for determination as it should have. Mrs X says the development will have a significant impact on her property and quality of life.
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: we could not add to any previous investigation by the council, or 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 Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
When a local authority receives a planning application it must look at the development plan and material planning considerations to decide if the proposal is acceptable. Material considerations relate to the use and development of the land in the public interest and includes matters such as the impact on neighbouring properties and the relevant planning policies. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material considerations in determining a planning application.
In this case, the Council has accepted it did not consider Mrs X’s objections and the application was not referred to the planning committee as it should have been. It says this error did not affect its decision to grant planning permission. However, it has apologised and offered Mrs X £250.
I consider this a suitable remedy in the circumstances. I am also satisfied the Council properly considered the acceptability of the proposal, including the impact on Mrs X’s property, before granting planning permission. Therefore, I consider it likely the decision to grant planning permission would be the same had the Council considered Mrs X’s objections and referred the application to the planning committee as it should have done.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the Council has already upheld the complaint and offered a suitable remedy for the injustice suffered. Further investigation by us would therefore not be proportionate.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman