Cheshire East Council rapped for misleading public in planning ‘cover-up’

Council bosses have been reprimanded after misleading the public over a planning application.

Cheshire East Council officers have been ordered to apologise and pay out £1,500 after an investigation found that they had ‘knowingly and persistently misled the public’. It also found maladministration on the part of the council.

Local Government Ombudsman Dr Jane Martin accused the council of an ‘apparent attempt to cover up’ an error.

She found that documents had appeared on a council website but had been dated to look as if they had been uploaded before a consultation had ended.

It is the second blow for the council this week, after the Information Commissioner ordered it to publish contract documents signed with Wilson Bowden concerning the £90m redevelopment of Macclesfield town centre.

The planning investigation was launched after residents complained that all the evidence had not been made available  before the  consultation had finished. The ombudsman found that  key evidence had not been made available for members of the public to comment on.

Council bosses have since apologised over the matter, admitting that there were ‘regrettable flaws’ in the process. They have accepted the conclusions and recommendations of the report, but said there was no attempt at ‘deliberate concealment’.

Peter Yates, former planning chief at Macclesfield council, said: “This is serious stuff.

“It is quite unusual because we’ve got a case where the ombudsman has found maladministration and injustice, asking the council not only to apologise but to pay out some money as well.”

Opposition councillor Laura Jeuda, who represents Macclesfield South, said: “It’s outrageous. They have only admitted fault at the end of the investigation.

“Not everybody has the money, time or experience to go this far.”

The Local Government Ombudsman has recommended that the council take advice on what options to take in relation to the granted application – and to consider revoking approval if necessary.

The watchdog was called in after residents claimed the council should not have granted  planning permission in relation to agricultural land in December 2011. Details of the application have not been released by the council or the ombudsman but it is not believed to involve land in Macclesfield.

The application was for a Certificate of Lawful Established Use or Development (CLEUD),  which gives landowners permission for a use that has been in place for a continuous period of 10 years without a formal challenge.

But residents claimed it was a new venture and resulted in the loss of a public footpath.

The ombudsman found that the council had published an aerial photograph on December 1 – two days after the consultation into the application had ended.

But it was found that the photograph was dated November 18 on the website.

The watchdog also found that the statutory declaration was not published until December 5 despite the planning department’s claim that it had been up since November 24.

In her report, Dr Martin said: “When residents and the town council alerted the council repeatedly to their concerns about the withholding of information they believed should have been on its website, the council had a duty to investigate and respond. To have knowingly and persistently misled the public was maladministration.”

She added: “The application was flawed and should not have been considered in the first instance, but despite that, it gave alarmingly significant weight to the applicant’s own testament regarding the previous use of the site.

“What is more concerning, however, is the council’s failure in its duty to properly consult with the community during the process – and the apparent attempt to cover up the error.”

She added: “An additional injustice is the loss of trust these members of the public will now have in their council as a local planning authority.”

Coun Rachel Bailey, Cheshire East Council cabinet member for development management, said they accepted the recommendations of the report, including giving staff CLEUD training and paying each of the three complainants £500.

She said: “First and foremost, I want to apologise on behalf of the council to local residents over the regrettable flaws in the process to reach this planning decision in December 2011.

“This planning issue is a historical matter that is the legacy of an officer who is no longer employed by the council.

“We accept the conclusions and recommendations of the report and are implementing them fully.

“We maintain that there was no deliberate concealment or that we meant to mislead the public.

“However, it is highly regrettable that not only were the documents not available prior to the end of the consultation but that we did initially believe that they had been. Much has changed positively in the council since then.  As a result, this is a council with new energy and new people and where poor service to the people of Cheshire East will simply not be tolerated.”