Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse the complainant’s application for a footway crossing. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X has complained about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a footway crossing in front of his property. Mr X says many other residents in the area have been given permission for a crossing and it will help ease congestion on the road.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. 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

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 as it said his request did not meet the criteria in its policy due to the impact on the environment and character of the area. Mr X appealed against the Council’s decision. He argued that many other residents had been given permission for a footway crossing. He also said the crossover would improve existing issues on the road.
7. The Council refused Mr X’s appeal. It said it considered the impact of removing or relocating the shrubs in front of Mr X’s home to allow for the crossing. However, it said it was adopting a stricter approach to maintain existing shrubs and verges and the shrubs that would require removal were in a healthy condition and established in their location.
8. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a footway crossing. But this was a decision the Council was entitled to make. Its decision was in line with its policy, and I am satisfied the Council properly considered Mr X’s appeal and explained its reasons for refusing his request. Therefore, it is unlikely I could find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman