Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for a non-material amendment under delegated authority. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the application. Nor can we achieve the outcome the complainant it is seeking.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council processing an outline planning application without the appropriate information, delaying its decision on the application, and how it dealt with his complaint. Even if there has been Council fault, the matters complained of do not cause Mr X sufficient significant injustice to warrant us investigating. We do not investigate councils’ complaint‑handling where we are not investigating the core issue giving rise to the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s consultation for a development funding agreement to redevelop a council car park. This is because the Council has decided not to proceed with the proposal and we could not therefore say its actions caused Mrs X significant injustice. We also could not achieve anything further for Mrs X by investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to follow the complaints process. We do not consider this has caused the complainant sufficient personal injustice to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a building control matter. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve a worthwhile outcome for the complainant.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council refused to take enforcement action over an outbuilding on neighbouring land. Further investigation would be unlikely to lead to a finding of fault or a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of planning and noise nuisance issues relating to a business operating close to his property. We will not investigate the complaint because past planning matters fall outside our jurisdiction due to the passage of time and we are unlikely to find evidence of fault in the way the Council has considered Mr X’s recent reports of noise nuisance.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s processing of his planning applications for permission to replace windows in his relative’s Grade II Listed property, or it indicating it would refuse all future applications for similar works. The matters complained of do not cause Mr X sufficient significant personal injustice to warrant investigation. Mr X had appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate which it would have been reasonable for him to have used. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council pre-judging planning applications to warrant investigation. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the grant of planning permission as there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning enforcement because the complaint is out of time and there is insufficient injustice to warrant investigation.

Summary: Ms X complains about Council planning decisions on a neighbour’s applications. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s grant of planning permission for construction of a property he bought as a new-build four years ago. This is because the complaint is late and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s planning decision on a change of use application for a nearby business, the licensing process for the same business, and officers not disclosing some licensing information. There is not enough evidence of fault in the planning or licensing processes to justify an investigation. Even if there were fault in the planning drainage issue, it does not cause Mr X sufficient significant injustice to warrant investigation. It would be reasonable for Mr X to pursue the freedom of information issue with the Information Commissioner’s Office if he is dissatisfied with the Council’s final response.

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to impose a planning condition proposed by its planning committee, and failure to properly follow its complaint process. We found fault but made no further recommendations because of the actions and changes the Council has already made.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with an application for a certificate of lawfulness of proposed use or development or a possible breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council. It is also not yet possible to determine if the complainant has suffered any significant injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for a major development near the complainant’s home. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision to approve the application.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and the injustice Mr X claims stems from the actions of the occupant of the neighbouring land.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant has the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant has the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.