The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council publicised and processed a planning application. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. Nor can we order the Council to reconsider an approved planning application.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council failed to inform residents about a planning application for four houses on a plot close to their homes. He says planning permission should be withdrawn.
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 continue an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(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 Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for four new houses in the village where he lives. However, the Ombudsman does not provide a right of appeal against such decisions. We can consider whether any alleged fault in the planning process is likely to have affected the decision.
Planning authorities must publicise all planning applications. Depending on the nature of the development, publication may be by: newspaper advertisement and/or site notice and/or neighbour notification These requirements are in The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.
The notice will invite ‘representations’ for or against the application and explain how those representations may be made. The opportunity to ‘make representations’ is not the same as being consulted. The authority must consider all material representations it receives but officers will not start a conversation with members of the public who have objected to a planning application.
In this case, the Council confirms: a site notice was erected at the site the parish council was notified; and details about the application were placed on its website.
The Council therefore met the statutory requirements for publicising the planning application.
The case officer report shows the Council considered the relevant policies and representations received.
The application was considered by the planning committee and the applicant, and a ward councillor spoke. Following a debate, the committee voted to approve the application with conditions.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council publicised and considered the planning application. Also, we cannot require the Council to revoke the planning permission or reconsider the application.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman