Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to install bollards outside his home or how it has dealt with his application for a vehicle crossover. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to install bollards preventing him from parking his car on his driveway. Mr X wants the Council to remove the bollards and process his application for a vehicle crossover. Mr X also says the Council didn’t warn him about its intention to install the bollards or attend his property when asked. Mr X says the Council’s actions have resulted in damage to his vehicle.

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 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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council found that Mr X has been using rubber ramps placed on the highway to park his vehicle on his drive. The Council says it removed the ramps and advised Mr X that he would need to apply for a vehicle crossover. When the Council found that Mr X was still accessing his driveway, it made the decision to install bollards outside his property.
7. Mr X has applied for a vehicle crossover, but the Council has said he will first need to submit a planning application as he lives in a conservation area.
8. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to install bollards outside his home because there is insufficient evidence of fault. The Council is the highway authority, and it has powers to prevent the unauthorised crossing of the highway which is an offence. At the time the Council made the decision to install the bollards it had evidence that Mr X was accessing his driveway and did not have approval for a vehicle crossover.
9. Mr X says the Council’s decision to install bollards has resulted in damage to his vehicle. I will not investigate this element of his complaint because insurers and the courts are better placed to consider the issue of liability for damage to property.
10. There is insufficient evidence of fault with the Council’s decision not to consider Mr X’s vehicle crossover application until planning permission is approved. Mr X lives in conservation area and therefore planning permission for the crossover is required.
11. Mr X feels he doesn’t need planning permission as the Council has previously said that any changes made to his front garden without planning permission would not be enforced. However, the planning permission that the Council has referred to is for the vehicle crossover and not the changes made to Mr X’s front garden.
12. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint which says the Council did not warn him that it would install the bollards or that it failed to attend when he asked it to temporarily move the bollards so he could move his car. The Council says that Mr X was warned verbally and that both the Council and its contractor visited his home and saw that no car was on his drive. I will not investigate these matters as we could not say for any certainty exactly what happened or what was said so we could not add to the Council’s investigation into these points.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman