The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.
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 properly consider the impact on her property which is a listed building. Mrs X says the proposed development will be harmful to the setting of the listed building and impact her outlook. Mrs X also says the development will cause loss of light and privacy to her home.
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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (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.
The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body for planning decisions. Instead, we consider if there was any fault with how the decision was made.
In this case, I am satisfied the Council properly assessed the acceptability of the development, including the impact on neighbouring properties and the nearby listed building, before granting planning permission. The case officer’s report referred to Mrs X’s objections and addressed her concerns. The officer also consulted the Council’s conservation officer and considered the setting of the listed building and an application previously refused for the site. However, the officer decided the proposal would not harm the significance of the heritage asset. The Council further addressed the impact on Mrs X’s home in its complaint responses and explained why it did not consider there would be an unacceptable impact on neighbouring amenity.
I understand Mrs X disagrees. But the case officer was entitled to use their professional judgment to decide the application was acceptable and the Ombudsman cannot question this decision unless it was tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered the application, it is unlikely I could find fault.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman