Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Mr X’s application for a footway crossing. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refused his application for a footway crossing at his home. He says the Council’s policy is too restrictive and similar nearby properties have a footway crossing. He also says the Council has not considered his personal circumstances.

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 provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council refused Mr X’s application for a footway crossing. It said his property's garden area does not meet its minimum size requirements for a car parked parallel to the public highway. It said this is in line with its policy.
7. The Council explained similar nearby properties were allowed a footway crossing under a previous policy. It also acknowledged Mr X’s personal circumstances but explained that it had to balance these against community safety and its policy.
8. I have not seen enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to justify investigating. It applied its policy and considered Mr X’s personal circumstances.
9. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman