Wokingham Borough Council (18 008 342)

Category : Transport and highways > Highway adoption

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 27 Jun 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mrs X has complained about plans to install a bus stop outside her home. There is no evidence of fault with how the Council dealt with this matter. However, there is fault with how it handled Mrs X’s complaint.

The complaint

  1. Mrs X has complained about a bus stop being installed outside her home. She says the bus stop is not needed and will have a significant impact on her property. Mrs X says the position of the bus stop does not comply with the Council’s policy and was not included on the plans the developer showed her when she purchased her home.
  2. Mrs X has also complained about how the Council has dealt with her complaint and the behaviour of an officer during a site visit.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
  2. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I have considered all the information from Mrs X and the Council including its response to my enquires. I have also considered the information available to the public on the Council’s website.
  2. A copy of this decision was sent in draft to Mrs X and the Council. I have considered the comments received in response.

Back to top

What happened

  1. In 2010, the Council received a planning application for outline permission to build a large housing development. The Council considered the application and planning permission was granted following an appeal. The outline permission established the acceptability of the scheme and included issues such as access and the layout of the housing development. In 2013, the Council received a reserved matters application for the development which it approved subject to conditions.
  2. In 2015, Mrs X moved into a house within the new development and in 2017, the developer started work to install a bus stop directly outside her home. Mrs X complained and the developer put the work on hold.
  3. Mrs X has complained about the impact the bus stop will have on her home. She says people using the stop will be able to look directly into her property and believes it will increase noise and litter outside her home. Mrs X is also concerned that the bus will block her driveway and says she would not have purchased the property had she known about the plans to install the stop.

What I found

  1. When planning permission was granted for the development, it was subject to conditions that the developer had to comply with. One of these conditions said that the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. I have reviewed the plans and can see that these do detail the location for the planned bus stops, including a stop outside Mrs X’s home. I understand Mrs X says the documents the developer gave her before she purchased the property did not show the bus stop. While I do not know exactly what information the developer gave Mrs X during the sales process, I cannot say the Council was at fault if this information was incorrect.
  2. Mrs X says the legal agreement between the Council and developer under section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 did not show that there would be a bus stop outside her home.
  3. When a new housing development is under way the developer can make an agreement with the highway authority (in this case the Council) under section 38 of the Highways Act to complete the road and hand it over to the Council to adopt on completion. The Council accepts that the plans submitted with the section 38 agreement did not show the bus stop outside Mrs X’s home. The Council says that once this error was noticed, it informed the developer, and this was rectified. However, Mrs X argues that the Council should have properly checked this document to ensure the plans were correct.
  4. I cannot say the Council is at fault in this regard. The plans included with the section 38 agreement would not override the approved plans submitted with the planning application. The Council also notified the developer of the error and this was rectified. In any event, even if it could be shown that the Council should have noticed the omission of the bus stop sooner, I cannot agree that its actions caused any significant injustice as the plans approved with the planning application did clearly show the stops.
  5. Mrs X has also argued that the location of the bus stop outside her home contradicts the Council’s Highways and Estates Planning policy. She says the bus stop is not necessary and there are alternative sites available where the stop can be installed.
  6. I cannot say it is fault that the Council has required the developer to complete the development, including the installation of the bus stops, in line with the approved plans. This is a condition of the planning permission and the developer would need to apply to vary any of the planning conditions. Mrs X says the decision to place the bus stop outside her home is not in line with the Council’s policy, but I am satisfied the Council properly considered this matter before granting planning permission. It consulted its highways department about the development and confirmed the highway arrangements were acceptable.
  7. I have also considered the concerns Mrs X has raised about the behaviour of the Council’s highways officer during the site visit. Mrs X says the officer was aggressive and threatening during the visit and her mother and husband who were also present can support this. The Council disputes Mrs X’s claims and says the meeting took place in a civil manner. It also argues that Mrs X did not raise her concerns at the time. However, Mrs X disagrees and says she did raise her concerns about the meeting in August 2017. In circumstances such as these, where both parties disagree, it will never be possible to know what happened. Therefore, based on the evidence available, I cannot conclude that there has been any fault.
  8. Mrs X has also complained about how the Council has dealt with her complaint. She says it took too long to respond to her concerns and did not address the issues she raised. The Council’s complaint process has three stages. Initially the Council will try to provide an early resolution to the issues. However, if the complainant remains unhappy, they can ask for a stage one review. The Council aims to send a stage one response within 15 working days. If the complainant remains unhappy, they can ask for a stage two review which should be carried out within 20 working days.
  9. Mrs X made a stage one complaint in March 2018 and received a response on 16 April. As Mrs X was unhappy with the Council’s reply, she asked for a stage two review, however the Council did not send a stage two response until the end of August 2018. It is clear the Council did not respond to Mrs X’s concerns in line with its policy. This is fault. While the Council did eventually respond to the complaint, it is likely the delay would have been frustrating for Mrs X. I also agree that the Council’s response wrongly gave the impression that it would consider a petition from residents. The Council’s constitution says that it cannot accept petitions that relate to planning matters. As the placement of the bus stop was included as part of the planning application the Council cannot accept a petition in this regard. The Council’s failure to explain this to Mrs X would likely have caused further frustration.

Agreed action

  1. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X for how it has dealt with her complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. There is no fault with how the Council dealt with matters relating to the planned installation of a bus stop outside Mrs X’s home. There is some fault with how it dealt with Mrs X’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings