The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of a planning application. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says the Council approved a planning application for a development which will spoil the road he lives in and reduce the value of his property. He says there were multiple conflicts of interest within the Planning Department, breaches of planning policy and a manipulation of the Planning Committee meeting at which permission was granted for the development.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) 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, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (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.
I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.
My assessment
Mr X complained to the Council about its decision to grant planning permission for a new development in his road.
The Council responded to his concerns in some detail but did not uphold it and found the application had been properly dealt with and the relevant policies and legislation followed.
It is clear Mr X does not agree with the decision the Council made on the application. However, it is not our role to act as a point of appeal. We cannot question decisions made by councils if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. I have seen no evidence to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision.
Mr X says the development is not in keeping with the character of the road but this is a decision for the Council to make. He says consideration of the application was affected by an existing relationship between a planning officer and the developer but the Council adequately addressed his concerns in its complaint response and it is Members, not officers, who made the decision on the application.
Mr X claims there was manipulation of the Committee meeting and time wasting. This too was looked at in some detail through the Council’s complaints procedure with the point made that the application was determined before the end of the meeting and did not require extra time.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman