Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for a dropped kerb. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for a dropped kerb.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X applied to the Council for a dropped kerb to the front of her property. Miss X has a Motability car and wants to be able to park it in front of her property. Miss X says she suffers from anxiety and panic attacks and does not drive her car due to concerns she will not be able to find a parking space close to home.
8. The Council refused Miss X’s application and upheld its decision at review panel. This was because Miss X’s property frontage did not meet the minimum size criteria and installation of a dropped kerb would encroach on the footpath and lead to the loss of multiple on street parking spaces for other residents.
9. Mrs X complained to the Council about its decision. She explained the difficulties she experiences with parking locally and her personal circumstances.
10. The Council did not uphold the complaint. It considered the information Miss X provided but confirmed its decision to refuse her application had been made in line with the current eligibility criteria and that Miss X’s property frontage falls short of the minimum size requirements. It noted Miss X had moved into the property recently following a successful bid via the housing register; that it met her needs as set out in her housing application and Miss X had not raised any issues around the property not meeting her needs when she accepted it. The Council informed Miss X there was an existing disabled parking bay close to her property which she could use to source parking close by.
11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because, whilst I acknowledge Miss X’s dissatisfaction with the Council’s decision to refuse her application, there is no sign of fault by the Council here. It has considered, decided and refused Miss X’s application in line with the eligibility criteria which applies to all applicants. It has considered Miss X’s circumstances but has upheld its original decision to refuse the application in line with the current policy. We are not an appeal body and we cannot question a council’s decision where, as here, there is no sign of fault in the way in which it was reached.
12. Miss X says the Council’s measurements of her property frontage were incorrect. I have not considered this point in this decision statement. This is because it was not raised in Miss X’s complaint to the Council. We are the final stage following the Council’s complaints procedure and so we only consider matters the Council has already had the opportunity to consider via its complaints procedure.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman