Monday 19 October: Complaint form offline

The supplier of our case management system has confirmed that they are experiencing a significant technical issue.

At present, we have no access to the case management system and we are currently unable to provide updates on existing cases.

We are planning on the basis that this could continue for a period of time including for the remainder of this week.

If you would like to check if your complaint is ready for the SPSO or enquire about making a new complaint, please complete our Complaint Checker.  

Please be assured we are doing all we can and will provide updates on our website. 

For an all service update: Service update | SPSO

Decision report 201101662

  • Case ref:
    201101662
  • Date:
    May 2012
  • Body:
    East Dunbartonshire Council
  • Sector:
    Local Government
  • Outcome:
    Not upheld, no recommendations
  • Subject:
    planning, privacy

Summary
Mr C complained about the council's handling of a planning application for a neighbour's conservatory. In particular Mr C complained that the council failed to comply with their guidance in relation to intervisibility and window distance and as a result had failed to protect his privacy in his own conservatory. He also complained that the council had failed to take account of his objections about privacy and overlooking, in that they had failed to take action when his neighbour had reduced in height the planting that had screened one of the windows in the conservatory.

We did not uphold Mr C's complaints. Our investigation found that the council's guidance was intended to be just that - guidance - and that planning officers were free to use their professional judgement when processing planning applications. In this case the council had explained why, in relation to conservatories, they had decided that the guidelines regarding intervisibility and window distance could be relaxed. We found no evidence that the council did not take into account Mr C's objections to the planning application. They had also explained as the planting was not required as a planning condition they could take no action when Mr C's neighbour reduced its height.

Updated: March 13, 2018