The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to carry out a comparison of why planning permission was granted for a particular planning application when Mr and Mrs X’s own applications have been refused. This is because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council and the substantive issue falls outside our jurisdiction due to the availability of appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate.
The complaint
The complainants, who I refer to as Mr and Mrs X, complain the Council has refused their request to carry out a comparison of why planning permission was granted for a particular planning application on agricultural green belt land when their applications for a development on green belt garden land have been refused.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended) The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b)) The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister and considers appeals including those about a decision to refuse planning permission.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Council, including its response to their complaint.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Over the years Mr and Mrs X have sought planning permission to build on their land in the green belt. Their applications have been refused and their appeals to the Planning Inspectorate have been unsuccessful.
Recently, Mr and Mrs X complained to the Council because it refused to provide the comparison they had asked for about why a particular planning application, Application Y, had been granted permission when their applications had been refused.
The Council explained that all applications are considered on their own merits and that their applications and Application Y, which had been granted permission by the Planning Inspector on appeal, were different proposals in different contexts. It said the differences were clear and no comparison of the two sites was necessary.
We cannot investigate complaints about council decisions on planning applications where applicants have used their appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate. We have no discretion here. Also, we will not investigate complaints about the refusal of a planning application where the applicant has available appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate as we would reasonably expect them to make use of this alternative remedy. The use of and the availability of appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate places this matter outside our jurisdiction.
Mr and Mrs X want an explanation as to why Application Y was granted permission when their applications have been refused. Council and Planning Inspector reports on each application will set out the reasons for refusal or permission. While Mr and Mrs X may not be satisfied with the information they have been given, the Council is not obliged to carry out a further review or comparison and it is not at fault in declining to do so.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council and the substantive issue falls outside our jurisdiction due to the availability of appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman