A PLANNING decision cannot be described as "wrong" just because objectors don't agree with it - according to an Ombudsman's report.

The Local Government Ombudsman has recently released a report into a complaint made against Bradford Council's planning department.

A resident, only referred to as Dr B in the report, had complained about a Council decision to grant planning permission to a neighbour to build an outbuilding in his garden.

The site, which is not identified in the report, is in a Conservation Area, and Dr B told the ombudsman that the decision had left him "distressed" as he had spent a lot of time objecting to the plan.

He demanded the decision be reviewed and the Council agree to never grant planning permission to his neighbour to build on their land again.

The ombudsman's report said the Council had followed normal planning policy with the decision, adding: "We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached."

Ombudsman dismisses complaint against Bradford planning department

Referring to the complainant's point that 20 people had objected to the plan, the report said: "People’s comments on planning and land use issues linked to development proposals will be material considerations.

"Councils must take such comments into account but do not have to agree with those comments.

"The Officer decided the application was acceptable. This is a professional judgement and decision the Officer is entitled to make. I understand that Dr B disagrees with the Case Officer’s opinion, this does not make it wrong.

"Dr B wants the Council to tell the applicant it will refuse any further proposals to build on the open space. The Council has a statutory obligation to consider any valid planning applications that it receives."

The report found there was "no fault" in the Council's decision.