An argument has erupted between two councils over proposals for a major housing development.

Hassocks Parish Council has launched formal complaint proceedings against Mid Sussex District Council over a row about 250 homes.

A three-day inquiry ended last Thursday concerning development plans for greenfield land off Mackie Avenue in Hassocks. The inquiry, at Adastra Hall, considered an appeal by Gleeson Homes.

The parish council has expressed "extreme disappointment" that in the days before the inquiry the district council decided to drop four of its five objections to proposals by developer Gleeson Homes.

Parish council chairman Noel Thomas wrote to planning boss Dick Lankester to complain and has launched a formal complaint against Mr Lankester after he refused to answer his questions.

Councillor Thomas said: "Since I wrote to Dick Lankester demanding answers regarding the change of position, he has responded saying he won't be responding.

He has just shut the door on us.

"The parish council is therefore starting an official complaint process with the district council because we don't think it's right that an officer should turn round to a parish council and say, I am not answering your questions'."

He said the parish council was not warned the district was going to drop its objections.

He said: "We were gobsmacked."

A district council spokesman confirmed it had received a complaint.

He said: "Mid Sussex District Council takes its responsibilities very seriously and there is an established complaints procedure in place.

"The objective of this procedure is to ensure all complaints are dealt with in a fair, consistent and thorough manner."

Dick Lankester has said the district council modified its objections after Network Rail withdrew concerns about safety and vandalism at a footpath crossing the railway.

Also, West Sussex County Council did not raise any concerns about highway issues or schools places and West Sussex Primary Care Trust has said it is happy with the proposal for a new health centre.

Finally, Southern Water agreed to upgrade a pumping station to increase sewer capacity and the developer agreed to sign a Section 106 requiring it to pay infrastructure costs.

The district council refused planning permission for the development in May last year.