Ombudsman.org.ukReviews 1

Following advice from the Planning Inspectorate, I submitted a complaint to the PHSO in May 2025 concerning a minor rear extension on my private land. The primary issue was a purported 22-day delay in receiving my appeal against East Suffolk Council's decision to refuse planning permission for a minor single-storey rear extension. This delay has had significant effects on my exclusion, quality of life, amenity, and has resulted in financial cost. I also strongly maintain that this decision did not fairly account for the extended Xmas holiday period, my ongoing complaint to the Local Government and social care Ombudsman, or the service limitations experienced by both their office and East Suffolk Council and maintain I was not out of time.
The PHSO did not apply reasonable discretion to reduce the disadvantages faced by individuals such as myself, nor did it initiate a review with the Planning Inspectorate despite having the authority to do so. The PHSO also possesses discretion in extending time limits but did not exercise this option. The reasons provided for this decision lack credibility and appear insufficient. The Chief Executive and Director informed and our MP all of whom have the power to intervene, but no action has been taken. Consequently, it is my position that the PHSO's decision was neither properly nor fairly considered and contributed to the creation of discriminatory barriers. I have concerns regarding the effectiveness of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) as an appropriate use of public funds. Specifically, growing apprehension that the PHSO has not adequately exercised discretionary powers to mitigate disadvantages and ensure equality. This raises questions about the institution's ability to fulfill its intended role impartially and proportionally.