The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application and the advice it provided to the complainant. This is because we are unlikely to find fault. The complainant has also appealed to the Planning Inspector.
The complaint
Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his planning application. Mr X says the Council encouraged him to make a planning application even though it knew it would not grant permission for the development. Mr X says the Council should refund the application fee he paid.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended) 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X applied to the Council for prior approval to extend his property. The application was refused as the Council said the proposal did not comply with the criteria set out in the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order.
Mr X then made a full planning application which was also refused. I understand Mr X may disagree with the reasons given for refusing the application. But the Ombudsman cannot consider a complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse planning permission. This is because Mr X has appealed to the Planning Inspector about the Council’s decision and the Ombudsman cannot investigate matters where someone has already used their appeal right.
Mr X has also complained about the advice the Council gave before he applied for planning permission. He says the Council told him to make the full application even though it knew permission would not be granted. The Council says it did not encourage Mr X to apply for planning permission and instead advised him how he could proceed after the prior approval application was refused.
I cannot say the Council was at fault for informing Mr X of his options after his first application was refused. The refusal of the prior approval application would also not necessarily mean that the proposal was unacceptable, only that a full planning application was required.
Mr X could have requested pre-application planning advice before submitting the application if he wanted to find out if the proposal was likely to be acceptable and the case officer informed Mr X’s agent of this option. However, Mr X chose not to request pre-application advice and the Council would not have considered the acceptability of the proposal until the application was received.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council. Mr X has also used his right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman