Local Government

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) raised a number of concerns about the handling of applications for planning permission and conservation area consent made to East Lothian Council (the Council) for a housing development in his village.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that the Council did not have proper regard to:

• (a)        policy statements in the Structure Plan and Local Plan and their obligations under sections 59 and 64 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 (the 1997 Act) in considering and determining the applications (not upheld); and
• (b)        the views of objectors and did not refer the matter to the Council's Planning Committee for determination (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainants (Mr and Mrs D) raised a number of concerns about the handling of applications for planning permission and conservation area consent made to East Lothian Council (the Council) for a housing development in their village.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that the Council did not have proper regard to:

• (a)        policy statements in the Structure Plan and Local Plan and their obligations under sections 59 and 64 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 (the 1997 Act) in considering and determining the applications (not upheld); and
• (b)        the views of objectors and did not refer the matter to the Council's Planning Committee for determination (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) raised concerns about the handling by North Lanarkshire Council (the Council) of planning applications for a site adjacent to his home.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that the Council did not:

• (a)        have proper regard to site levels in the development (not upheld);
• (b)        ensure that appropriate plans were made available to enable neighbours properly to gauge the effect of the proposed development on their privacy (not upheld); and
• (c)        insist that the play area for the development was incorporated within the development rather than adjacent to existing housing (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.

Overview

The complainant Ms C raised a number of concerns about how the City of Edinburgh Council (the Council) dealt with her reports to them about the removal of an original fireplace from a listed building.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that the Council failed to deal with Ms C's concerns about the fireplace appropriately (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

• (i)         within three months, follow up the evidence disclosed in this report and consider whether there are grounds to review their decision to take no further enforcement action;
• (ii)        emphasise to Enforcement Officers the importance of obtaining entry and making proper enquiries; and
• (iii)       apologise to Ms C for failing to deal with her concerns appropriately.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complainant Ms C raised a number of concerns about Fife Council (the Council)'s response to the presence of a group of travellers who had set up camp near her business.  Ms C said that the Council's contractors had left the gate open which had allowed the travellers to gain access to the site.  Ms C further complained about the way that the Council handled her complaint.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)        the Council failed to act in accordance with their policies (not upheld);
• (b)        the Council's contractors left the gate open which allowed the travellers to gain access to the site (no finding); and
• (c)        the Council failed to handle Ms C's complaints in a reasonable manner (not upheld). 

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mr D) raised concerns about the handling by North Lanarkshire Council (the Council) of planning applications for a site adjacent to this home.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that the Council did not:

• (a)        have proper regard to site levels in the development (not upheld);
• (b)        ensure that appropriate plans were made available to enable neighbours properly to gauge the effect of the proposed development on their privacy (not upheld); and
• (c)        insist that the play area for the development was incorporated within the development rather than adjacent to existing housing (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendation to make.

Overview

Ms C's children were removed from a School (School X) in Comhairle nan Eilean Siar (the Council) area, and Ms C was unhappy about the standard of communication from the Council in response to her concerns about this.  Following completion of the Council's complaint procedure, Ms C complained to the Ombudsman that the communication during the complaints process and following the Council's final decision was also inadequate.

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that communication from the Council in response to Ms C's concerns about her children's removal from School X and the subsequent handling of her complaint was inadequate (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

• (i)         ensure that information given to complainants at the end of each stage of the complaints process is sufficient to allow them to consider whether or not to proceed;
• (ii)        emphasise in guidance to relevant staff that when faults have been identified, consideration is given to making an appropriate apology and information given of any action taken to improve Council process and procedures as a result of their complaint; and
• (iii)       formally apologise to Ms C for the failing identified by the Panel on 2 December 2005.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complainants (Mr and Mrs C) complained that information on a sign at the gates of a cemetery was inaccurate.  They had based their decision to have their child interred in the cemetery on the information on this sign and other information supplied to them by North Lanarkshire Council (the Council).

Specific complaint and conclusion

The complaint which has been investigated is that the information on the sign at the gates of the cemetery, which played a large part in Mr and Mrs C's decision to have their child interred there, was inaccurate (upheld).

Redress and recommendations

The Ombudsman recommends that the Council:

• (i)         reconsider their decision not to close the cemetery gates in light of the discrepancy between the decision and the Rules, and thereafter install signage that accurately reflects the security of the cemeteries and ensure that the Rules are compatible with the outcome of the decision; and
• (ii)        addresses the specific injustice caused to Mr and Mrs C by apologising to them for the distress caused by the misleading signage and, whilst reconsidering their decision as noted in (i) above, the Council take action to ensure that paragraph 36 of the Rules is properly enforced.  This could take the form of regular security checks being made in cemeteries outside manned hours or further liaison with the Police to ensure adequate patrols are made of cemeteries.

The Council have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.

Overview

The complainant, Mr C, alleged that there were a number of improper processes involved in the Council's decision to move the village of Freuchie into the Kirkcaldy and Mid Fife area for strategic planning purposes.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that the Council:

• (a)        failed to carry out local consultation before changing the local plan boundaries (not upheld);
• (b)        failed to take account of the complainant's views despite confirmation that they would do so (not upheld);
• (c)        misrepresented the situation (not upheld); and
• (d)        encouraged staff not to disclose information (not upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.

Overview

The complainant (Mr C) raised concerns about the way Council officers handled a Planning Committee hearing and about the response of South Lanarkshire Council (the Council) to his complaints.

Specific complaints and conclusions

The complaints which have been investigated are that:

• (a)        the Council unfairly denied Mr C, on behalf of the objectors whom he was representing, the opportunity to put points to the Council's Planning Committee on 30 August 2005 (not upheld); and
• (b)        the Council failed to properly deal with Mr C's complaints (partially upheld).

Redress and recommendation

The Ombudsman has no recommendations to make.