A LONG-standing dispute over a house built 17 years after planning consent was first granted, is to be referred to the Local Government Ombudsman.
Residents of two properties in Marton Close, Culcheth, near Warrington are referring the matter to the Ombudsman after the borough council decided there were no legitimate planning grounds for the authority to take enforcement action over an access to Marton Close from the new house in adjoining Twiss Green Lane.
The Marton Close residents claim the access – which the council originally assumed was a temporary one for construction traffic only – causes them a loss of amenity.
A LONG-standing dispute over a house built 17 years after planning
consent was first granted, is to be referred to the Local Government
Ombudsman.
House dispute goes to Ombudsman
11 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
1 Comment
As I understand it, the complainants had no option but to go to the LGO, as the head of planning John Groves published a report to the development control committee which bascially was not truthful. The LGO states
The Senior Planning Officer mislead the Committee and provided it with an account suggesting that the Council had done
nothing wrong and was not responsible for the public’s and the police’s problems.It was maladministration to deprive the elected Members of a full and accurate
account of the facts.
I cannot think of any other instance whereas an employee would be allowed to get away such disgraceful behaviour. To be blunt, they would most likely be sacked!. John Groves is still the head of planning & the development is still in breach of several planning conditions.