Summary: The Ombudsman cannot continue the investigation into this complaint about planning enforcement because there is an ongoing prosecution. Once the enforcement process is complete, the complainant may bring their complaint back to the Ombudsman to consider further.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his planning application. If Mr X felt the Council was wrong to request changes to his proposal it would have been reasonable for him to refuse the changes and appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: Mr X complains there was fault in the way the Council discharged a planning condition relating to the disposal of surface water. There was fault in the way the Council assessed the proposal to discharge this condition, but this fault has not caused Mr X a significant injustice.

Summary: Ms X complains about planning permission granted for decking to a neighbouring property. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Planning Committee considered the matter and no grounds for the Ombudsman to question the decision reached.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint which alleged it failed to evaluate the drainage plans of a developer critically in its role as statutory consultee on a planning application.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about planning applications for development next to the complainant’s home. It is unlikely he would find fault in how the Council advertised the applications that affected the outcome. A possible breach of planning conditions which concerns the complainant cannot yet have occurred.

Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of a parish council that the Council rejected its application to plant oak trees along the highway. The Ombudsman cannot investigate the complaint as we cannot investigate complaints from public bodies.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint which alleged it failed to act against breaches of planning control at a property close to the complainant’s home.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to consult him on a planning application. It is unlikely we would find fault by the Council affecting its decision to grant planning permission and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council granted planning permission for development close to his home. It is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his planning application as he has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint that the Council’s decision on their neighbour’s planning application is not consistent with its decision on their application. If Mr and Mrs X were not happy with the Council’s decision on their planning application they could have applied for permission for a different scheme and appealed against any refusal. The Council’s decision on their neighbour’s application does not cause them injustice.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that a planning officer unnecessarily forced him to use more expensive materials for his building project. It is unlikely investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain the Council has wrongly approved planning permission for a neighbouring property. They are concerned the Council did not take account of their concerns and did not follow adopted policies in the Neighbourhood Plan, and Supplementary Planning Guidance. There is no evidence of fault in the way Council considered the planning application to develop the back garden of a neighbouring property.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council has failed to take enforcement action regarding an unauthorised structure in 2018. The Ombudsman has not found evidence of fault by the Council. He has completed the investigation and not upheld the complaint.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about the way the Council publicised and considered a planning application. We found fault as the Council failed to notify Mr and Mrs X about the proposed development so they lost an opportunity to comment. The Council has accepted it was at fault. It has apologised and offered a payment in recognition of the distress caused. We found no fault in the way the Council considered the application.

Summary: Mr X complains the Authority did not properly consider a planning application for a car wash operation. He also complains the Authority failed to enforce the planning conditions. As a result, Mr X has suffered from noise from the operation. There is no evidence of fault. When considering the planning application, the Authority noted the concerns raised and decided these could be addressed using planning conditions. It has taken action to ensure compliance with those conditions.

Summary: Mr X has complained about how the Council has dealt with his neighbour’s planning application. There is evidence of fault, but this has not caused any significant injustice.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to protect his amenity and encouraged his neighbour to breach his private rights when it approved a planning application. There was no fault in the way the Council made its planning decision.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a neighbour’s house. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council has handled the determination of a planning application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and the alleged fault has not caused the complainant to suffer a significant injustice.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to take action against a developer for an alleged breach of planning control. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because we have not seen any evidence of fault. And we do not consider Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants our involvement.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. The complaint is late and it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council affecting its decision to grant planning permission.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her planning application. It is unlikely we would find fault by the Council and if Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision it would be reasonable for her to appeal.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about failures by the Council’s planning department. Ms X has complained in her capacity as a parish councillor and the law does not allow us to investigate such complaints.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his planning application. Mr X has appealed against the Council’s decision to refuse his application and this brings his complaint outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered a planning application for an extension close to Mr and Mrs X’s property.