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.

  • Surrey County Council (22 017 931)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 25-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take enforcement action against a breach of planning control on land near the complainant’s home. The Council confirms it is in ongoing dialogue with the landowners with a view to resolving the breach. We do not consider the complainant has suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants an investigation.

  • Braintree District Council (22 018 236)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 25-Apr-2023

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with his planning application for a dropped kerb, crossover and off-street parking. Mr X has appealed against the Council’s refusal of the permission to the Planning Inspectorate. That appeal takes the entire matter out of our jurisdiction, so we cannot investigate it.

  • Dorset Council (22 018 215)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 25-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about incorrect media statements regarding the content of the Local Plan. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The fault has not caused the complainant a significant personal injustice, and the Council has already taken satisfactory action in response to the complaint.

  • Telford & Wrekin Council (23 000 700)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 25-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s online planning system. This is because it is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would add to the Council’s response or achieve anything more for the complainant.

  • Somerset West and Taunton Council (22 006 272)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 25-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council is considering a planning application because no decision has yet been made and so any injustice is speculative.

  • St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (22 011 322)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning advice 25-Apr-2023

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council acted with fault in its handling of his planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

  • West Northamptonshire Council (22 013 013)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 25-Apr-2023

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for her neighbour’s works would lead to an unacceptable loss of privacy to her back garden. We have not found fault in how the Council considered the planning application.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (22 018 009)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Building control 24-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to the complainants’ reports that his neighbour has carried out unauthorised building work. We have not seen any evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the report and decided it cannot take any action against the neighbour.

  • Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (22 016 867)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 24-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decisions not to take formal enforcement action against light pollution and a breach of planning control. We are unlikely to add to the Council’s investigation on these points. Also, it is reasonable to expect the complainant to contact the Information Commissioner’s Officer if he is not satisfied with the Council’s responses to his requests for information.

  • Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council (22 017 215)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 24-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a delay in the Council taking enforcement action against a breach of planning control. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The complaint is late, and we have seen no good reason to investigate it now.

  • Test Valley Borough Council (22 017 726)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 24-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning permission granted to a neighbour because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

  • North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (22 014 291)

    Statement Not upheld Planning applications 24-Apr-2023

    Summary: Mrs B complained that the Council, in approving signage for a car park, failed to take account of its Public Sector Equality Duty to ensure the signs were accessible to disabled people. We have not found fault with the actions of the Council.

  • Eastbourne Borough Council (22 015 172)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 24-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s street-numbering approval. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and the injustice Ms X claims is largely the result of the actions of third parties, rather than the Council’s decision.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (22 016 151)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 24-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application for mobile phone mast. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Derbyshire Dales District Council (22 016 922)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 23-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered and approved a planning application. Or about its consideration of a breach of planning control. We have not seen evidence of the fault in the Council’s actions to justify an investigation.

  • Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council (22 016 655)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 23-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application near the complainant’s homes. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify investigating.

  • Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority (22 012 535)

    Statement Upheld Planning applications 23-Apr-2023

    Summary: Mr X complained his objections to a planning application were not considered by the Authority before it made its decision. There was evidence fault causing injustice to Mr X, which was remedied by the authority’s apology. The authority has accepted our recommendations to avoid further recurrence of the fault.

  • Mid Sussex District Council (22 017 488)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 19-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to read out the complainant’s objection statement at a Planning Committee meeting. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The error is unlikely to have affected the overall planning outcome, and the Council has already taken satisfactory action to address the administrative problems which occurred.

  • Cheshire West & Chester Council (22 017 422)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 19-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s investigation into Mr X’s claims that a business is being run in a residential area. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Erewash Borough Council (22 017 049)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 19-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the designation of land owned by Ms X as Greenbelt under the Council’s Local Plan. This is because the matter has already been the subject of earlier complaints to the Ombudsman and because Land Registry information Ms X has more recently obtained is not new information which would lead us to investigate the same matter again.

  • Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council (23 000 012)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 19-Apr-2023

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

  • West Northamptonshire Council (22 017 580)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 19-Apr-2023

    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.

  • Rutland County Council (22 017 877)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 19-Apr-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her planning application. This is because the injustice she claims results from the Council’s views and decision on the application and if she disagrees with these it would be reasonable for her to appeal. In the event Ms X has appealed, as she suggests she has, this removes our discretion to investigate.

  • City of York Council (22 012 570)

    Statement Upheld Building control 19-Apr-2023

    Summary: Mr B says the Council’s building control officer failed to carry out site visits he paid for and inaccurately said more visits took place than was the case. The Council’s records for this building control case are poor, the record of visits undertaken does not support the Council’s claims in correspondence with Mr B and there is no evidence a completion visit took place. An apology and payment to Mr B, a further building control inspection and a reminder to officers is satisfactory remedy.