Complaining to the Ombudsman about a planning decision
An ombudsman complaint about a planning decision succeeds on procedural fault and injustice, not on disagreement with the outcome. Here is what to include and what the Ombudsman can actually recommend.
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman investigates how a council reached a planning decision, not whether the decision was right. An ombudsman planning complaint that says the wrong answer was given will be closed quickly. A complaint that says the council failed to consult the people it was required to consult, or that the officer report gave councillors materially wrong information, is the kind that gets investigated.
The distinction comes from the Local Government Act 1974, which gives the Ombudsman power to investigate maladministration causing injustice while expressly preventing it from questioning the merits of a decision taken without maladministration. Everything about how you write the complaint follows from that one line.
What counts as maladministration
There is no statutory definition, which is deliberate. In practice the Ombudsman looks for administrative fault, and the recurring categories in planning are recognisable:
- Failing to carry out consultation or publicity required by law or by the council's own adopted policy.
- An officer report to committee that omits a material consideration, or that misdescribes the site, the policy position or the consultation responses.
- Failing to consider a consultation response that was received in time.
- Delay that goes beyond the reasonable, including long delays in determining an enforcement complaint.
- Failing to follow the council's own published procedures, such as its scheme of delegation or its speaking rights at committee.
- Giving wrong advice on which the complainant reasonably relied.
Notice what is missing. Disagreeing with the weight the council gave to overlooking, or with its conclusion that the design was acceptable, is not on the list. Those are planning judgements, and they belong to the council.
Injustice, and why it matters as much as fault
Fault alone is not enough. The Ombudsman must also find that the fault caused injustice to the complainant personally.
Injustice can be a lost opportunity, for example being deprived of the chance to object because the site notice was never posted. It can be distress, uncertainty or avoidable time and trouble. It can be a financial loss where one flows directly from the fault.
The causation test does real work here. If a neighbour was not notified but made a detailed objection anyway, and the committee considered every point they raised, the Ombudsman may find fault without injustice. So say explicitly what you would have done differently, and what you lost by not being able to do it.
Exhaust the council's own complaints procedure first
The Ombudsman will normally not look at a complaint until the council has had a chance to resolve it. Most councils run a two stage corporate complaints procedure, and both stages need to be completed.
Do this in writing, through the corporate complaints route rather than by emailing the case officer. Ask for a written response at each stage and keep the dates. If the council does not respond within its published timescale, or refuses to register the complaint, say so when you approach the Ombudsman, because that is itself a reason to accept the complaint early.
There is an exception. Where the council has made clear it will not act, or where delay would cause further injustice, the Ombudsman can take a complaint before the local procedure has finished. It is a discretion, so ask for it and give reasons rather than assuming it.
Time limits
The Ombudsman normally will not investigate a complaint made more than 12 months after the complainant became aware of the matter. The clock runs from awareness, not from the date of the decision.
Discretion exists to accept late complaints where there is a good reason for the delay, and the discretion is used sparingly. If something happened three years ago and you only learned of it last month, explain how and when you found out, with evidence.
Note that pursuing the council's complaints procedure does not stop the clock indefinitely. Start early and run both processes in sequence without gaps.
What the Ombudsman can and cannot do
Remedies are recommendations to the council, and councils almost always comply. Typical outcomes are an apology, a payment for distress or for time and trouble, a payment reflecting a quantified loss, a correction to a record, and a service improvement such as revised procedures or staff training.
What the Ombudsman cannot do is quash a planning permission. Once permission is granted it takes effect, and only the Administrative Court can set it aside on judicial review. The practical consequence is stark: if a permission has been granted because of a procedural failure, the building will still be built, and the remedy will be a payment that does not feel proportionate to what you have lost.
This is why timing matters more than anything else in this area. A judicial review claim in a planning case must normally be filed within six weeks of the grant of permission. If the failure is serious and the development has not started, take legal advice on judicial review straight away rather than spending six months in a complaints procedure that cannot undo the decision.
The Ombudsman also cannot investigate where there was a right of appeal to a tribunal, minister or court, unless it was not reasonable to expect the complainant to use it. Applicants refused permission are therefore usually directed to the appeal system rather than to the Ombudsman.
Writing a complaint that gets investigated
Structure it around the fault and the injustice, and keep the planning merits out of it.
- State what the council was required to do, citing the source. The Development Management Procedure Order for publicity requirements, the council's own statement of community involvement, its scheme of delegation, or its published enforcement policy.
- State what it actually did, with dates and documents. Attach the officer report, the decision notice, the consultation record and your own correspondence.
- Identify the gap between the two in one sentence.
- Say what you would have done if the council had acted properly, and what you lost.
- State the outcome you want, and make it something the Ombudsman can recommend.
Keep it short. A four page complaint with an indexed bundle is more likely to be investigated than a forty page narrative, because an investigator has to be able to see the fault quickly.
And be accurate about the planning process. Understanding the documents an applicant is required to submit and what the council must do with them makes the difference between a complaint that identifies a procedural failure and one that rehearses an objection the committee already rejected.
What to do while you wait
Investigations take months. Meanwhile, keep monitoring the site and the register, because conditions still have to be discharged and any variation needs a further application that you can comment on.
If the concern is about how a policy or a procedure works rather than about one decision, the more effective route is often to engage with the local plan or with the council's review of its statement of community involvement. Following changes in national planning law through the planning law updates timeline helps you tell the difference between a council doing something wrong and a council applying a rule you dislike.
One honest limitation. The Ombudsman route is best understood as accountability rather than remedy. It can change how a council behaves next time. It rarely changes what happened to you.
If you are unsure whether your concern is a procedural failure or a disagreement with planning judgement, write the one sentence that describes the gap between what the council had to do and what it did. If you cannot write that sentence, the complaint is probably about the merits.
If you are on the other side of the counter and preparing your own scheme, you can enter a postcode on PlanScope to see which reports a site is likely to need.
This is general guidance, not legal advice. Time limits for judicial review are short and strictly applied, so take advice from a qualified professional promptly if you think a permission may be unlawful. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.
Frequently asked questions
Can the Ombudsman overturn a planning permission?
No. Only the Administrative Court can quash a planning permission, through judicial review, and a planning claim must normally be filed within six weeks of the grant. The Ombudsman can recommend an apology, a payment for distress or quantified loss, and service improvements, but the permission and any development built under it stand.
What is the time limit for complaining to the Ombudsman?
Normally 12 months from the date you became aware of the matter, not from the date of the decision. There is discretion to accept later complaints where there is a good reason for the delay, but it is used sparingly. Explain how and when you found out, and provide evidence of that date.
Do I have to use the council's complaints procedure first?
Usually yes. Most councils run a two stage corporate complaints procedure and the Ombudsman expects both stages to be completed. The Ombudsman can accept a complaint earlier where the council has made clear it will not act or where delay would cause further injustice, but you need to ask and give reasons.
Is a wrong planning decision maladministration?
Not by itself. The Local Government Act 1974 prevents the Ombudsman from questioning the merits of a decision taken without maladministration. The complaint has to identify administrative fault, such as missing consultation, a materially misleading officer report, unreasonable delay or a failure to follow the council's own published procedures.
Can an applicant complain about a refusal?
Rarely with success. The Ombudsman will not normally investigate where there was a right of appeal, and a refused applicant can appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. Complaints from applicants tend to be accepted only where the fault is about handling rather than outcome, such as extreme delay or a failure to follow the council's own procedures.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.