Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the approval of a vehicle crossing dropped kerb. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council requiring her application for a dropped kerb to meet requirements which she does not agree with. She says she wanted a wider kerb along a longer frontage than the Council has stipulated. She says other houses have wider crossings and she wants hers to match previously approved ones.

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 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X applied for a dropped kerb for a vehicle crossing at her home. The Council approved the application but rejected her request for an extra-wide kerb. Its highway officer also marked out the highway indicating where the kerb should be sited. Miss X says she wanted the dropped kerb siting so that it matched the one on the opposite side of the road which was approved under a previous policy.
6. The Council told Miss X that it referred to the terms of its policy on dropped kerbs when she completed the application and that she was required to agree to the terms. The policy sets out the limit of three flat kerbs and two tapering ones which is what was marked out for Miss X’s location.
7. We may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members. If there has been no flaw in the process through which a decision has been taken the Ombudsman will not challenge the merits of the decision itself. In this case the Council is the highway authority and applicants for vehicle crossings are required to meet the policy requirements.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint about the approval of a vehicle crossing dropped kerb. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman