Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his application to extend a dropped kerb. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and its actions have not caused Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council delayed in dealing with his application to extend a dropped kerb. He is also unhappy with the Council’s decision to refuse his application.

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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X applied to an extend an existing dropped kerb outside his property on 4 July 2021. The Council’s website explains there is a fee of £158 for the application process and this is non-refundable, even if the application is refused.
6. The Council refused Mr X’s application on 30 July 2021. This was because the existing dropped kerb was already 4.5m wide and its policy does not allow for extensions. Mr X believes the Council’s application of the policy is unfair in his case as there is an obstruction which stops him from using the dropped kerb to access his drive.
7. The Council’s decision is in-line with its policy and I have seen no evidence of fault in the way it was reached; the decision is a matter of professional judgement and there is no basis for us to question it.
8. The matter has also not caused Mr X significant injustice. Mr X applied to extend the dropped kerb in the knowledge his application may be unsuccessful and that he would not be entitled to a refund if it was refused. There is an existing dropped kerb which provides some access to his drive and if he cannot pull fully onto the drive he may park on the road outside his property.
9. While Mr X was frustrated by the Council’s alleged delay, it confirmed its decision within four weeks of his application and any injustice Mr X suffered over this period is not enough to warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and the matter does not cause Mr X significant enough injustice to warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman