Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a highway kerb because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has refused to take responsibility for the work needed to lower the gradient between the pavement outside his home and the highway. Mr y says this means his vehicle is damaged each time he uses his driveway.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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 or continue 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

4. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council has considered the issue Mr Y has raised. It has explained that it has adopted the footpath along Mr Y’s street following the building of a new development which Mr Y lives in. It acknowledges that it has a responsibility to maintain the footpath as the Highways Authority so that it is safe for the public to use. It has said this would not include as part of its budget, the change in gradient to help Mr Y leave his property more smoothly.
6. Following a site visit, the Council has suggested that Mr Y applies for a dropped kerb to resolve the issue he is experiencing. It has offered to carry out the assessment for this without charging Mr Y but has said he would need to pay for the work to be completed if his application were successful.
7. The Council has considered the issue Mr y has complained about and has had regard to relevant information, including that collected at the site visit. It has explained its decision and its rationale about why it would not consider the required work as part of its role and responsibilities and has provided Mr Y with guidance on how he can apply for a vehicle cross-over if he wishes the kerb gradient to be lowered. As there is not enough evidence of fault in its decision-making process, and we are not an appeals body, we cannot question its decision. As there is not enough evidence of fault, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman