Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s refusal of her vehicle crossover application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complains the Council wrongly refused her application for a vehicle crossover. Mrs B says she needs off street parking because of her child’s health condition, and other properties on her street have crossovers.

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 impact 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs B and the Council’s Vehicle Crossover Policy.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation into Mrs B’s complaint.
6. The Council refused Mrs B’s application because her property does not have an off street parking area with a minimum depth of 4.8 metres. I have not seen any information to indicate this assessment was affected by fault. The Council’s decision is in line with the site requirements set out in the Council’s Vehicle Crossover Policy.
7. This Policy says it is the site which is considered rather than the occupier circumstances and the Council must apply its current policy requirements to each application.
8. So, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman