New planning complaint decisions

A weekly update on planning complaint decisions

Please note: our decisions are published six weeks after they are issued to councils, care providers and the person who has made the complaint. The cases below reflect the caselaw and guidance available at the time of issue and the individual circumstances of each case.


Summary: Mr X complains about the grant of planning permission for a neighbouring property. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council allowing pile driving on a development close to the complainant’s home. The Planning Inspector granted planning permission without controls on such activity. Therefore, the Council cannot stop or restrict it.

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council dealt with his planning application. We will not investigate this complaint because he has a right of appeal to a Planning Inspector.

Summary: Mr X complains about lack of planning enforcement action against a neighbouring development. We will not investigate this complaint because we cannot determine injustice until the planning application had been determined.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not properly investigated and acted on a planning enforcement complaint, resulting in his suffering continued noise disruption, distress, time and trouble. We find fault in the Council’s application of its planning enforcement policy and fault in its communications with Mr X, causing Mr X injustice. We recommend the Council provides Mr X with an apology, payment for distress and a further response to his complaint. Further, that it amends its policy to accurately reflect its practice.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for development on land on the edge of his village. We did not investigate his complaints further because Mr X was not caused a significant injustice or an injustice for which we would recommend a remedy.

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council considered a planning application for a development near him. We will not investigate this complaint because the matter is out of time.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s grant of planning permission for a nursery in 2016. We will not investigate this complaint because the complaint is out of time.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s grant of planning permission for an extension by his neighbour. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

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

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about matters relating to the implementation of a planning permission and their restrictive covenant. We will not investigate the complaint because an investigation is unlikely to lead to the outcome the complainants seek.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about ownership of land behind Mr X’s property. This is because Mr X has known about this issue since at least 2017 but did not complain to the Ombudsman until 2021. Therefore this is a late complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council should not have granted planning permission for the complainant’s neighbour to build an extension. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council had failed to decide a prior approval application within planning regulation time limits, so lost the chance to control the siting and appearance of a telecommunications mast. There was fault because the Council did not act within the regulation time limit, and this caused Mr X uncertainty and disappointment. The Council has remedied this by making satisfactory improvements to its planning service.

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for a bungalow near her home, which she says affects her amenity. There was no fault in the Council’s decision making process.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application to vary a planning condition relating to land drainage. There was no fault in the Council’s decision making process.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with planning applications and possible breaches of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because the complainant has not suffered any significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not replacing a sports facility. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is no evidence of fault by the Council and we could not provide the remedy the complainant seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a new property at the rear of Mrs X’s home. This is because she has not been caused a significant injustice.

Summary: the complainants Mr X and Y & Co complained the Council failed to properly consider a planning application to develop land near their property. They believed this would cause a loss of privacy, security and adversely impact on Y & Co’s business. The Council said it had properly considered the application at two committee meetings with the complainants speaking at those meetings. We found the Council acted without fault.

Summary: Mr D complains about the Council’s handling of several planning applications, lawful development certificate applications and an Enforcement Notice. We cannot investigate this part of the complaint as Mr D has already appealed to the Planning Inspectorate. Nor will we investigate this complaint about the Council’s Building Control service as this is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: the complainants Mr X and Y & Co complained the Council failed to properly consider a planning application to develop land near their property. They believed this would cause a loss of privacy, security and adversely impact on Y & Co’s business. The Council said it had properly considered the application at two committee meetings with the complainants speaking at those meetings. We found the Council acted without fault.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council has failed to ensure the width of footpaths on a new estate comply with its footpath diversion order. The Council has agreed to assess the position, consult with Derbyshire County Council highways, and write to Mr X to explain the outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an error in a planning report. This is because we are satisfied with the Council’s issuing of a correction statement. Further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs D is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to grant his neighbour planning permission to develop their property. This is because there is on evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with concerns raised about a wood burner and flue installed at a property near the complainant’s home. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

Summary: Mr Z complained about a planning matter. He says the Council has included an area of land in an adopted local development plan which is incompatible with national planning policy. Mr Z wants the Council to remove the site from the plan. However, we are unlikely to find fault by the Council. For that reason, we cannot tell the Council to remove the site from the plan as we have no power to question the merits of a properly made decision. Further, we do not consider Mr Z has suffered serious loss, harm or distress by reason of any fault by the Council. For these reasons, we are discontinuing our investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to grant retrospective planning permissions for new houses near the complainant’s home. We have not seen any evidence of fault in the decision-making process.