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

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains the Council has refused his application for a dropped kerb which would allow him to cross the pavement and park outside his home. He says the Council has refused the application as his drive is less than the requirement length of 4.75 metres.
2. Mr Y thinks this is unfair as there are several driveways with dropped kerbs along the road with driveways which are shorter than 4.75 metres. He says the number of dropped kerbs elsewhere on his road means he finds it hard to park on the road without having to park over another person’s driveway.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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))

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. Mr Y applied to the Council for permission to have a dropped kerb in January 2021. The application was refused later that month. Mr Y complained to the Council about the decision in March.
6. Mr Y says he spoke to the Council in approximately March 2021. He says he was told the required driveway length had always been 4.75 metres but the Council had changed how it considered applications in July 2019 to ensure driveways shorter than 4.75 metres would be refused. Mr Y’s driveway is 3.5 metres.
7. The Council later responded to Mr Y’s complaint in February 2022, explaining its reason for refusing the application as that the drive was too short under the criteria for allowing a dropped kerb to be installed. Mr Y approached us in March.

Analysis

8. The Council has applied its policy that it will not give permission for a dropped kerb to allow Mr Y to drive over the pavement where his driveway is less than 4.75 metres. Mr Y’s driveway is 3.5 metres, more than a metre shorter than the requirement. This is the reason the Council has given for refusing his application. It is unlikely we would find fault with this decision as it has been made in accordance with the Council’s policy.
9. However, Mr Y feels aggrieved others in his road have been able to get permission in the past to have a dropped kerb, despite their driveways being shorter. He says the policy has always been that a driveway length must be 4.75 metres and says that if others on the road have been allowed a shorter length, then it is unfair that he has not been allowed a dropped kerb.
10. While we acknowledge Mr Y’s feeling of unfairness, those applications, made over several years, are not his application. Those applications were likely decided under different criteria before the Council changed its approach to applications for a dropped kerb in 2019. We can only consider how Mr Y’s application was considered under the current policy, so these instances do not set a precedent as Mr Y has suggested.
11. For these reasons, as the Council has followed its policy in its refusal of Mr Y’s application, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. 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