Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr and Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse their application for a vehicle crossover. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons for the Ombudsman to exercise his discretion and now investigate.

The complaint

1. The complainants, whom I shall call Mr and Mrs B, complain that in 2016 the Council incorrectly measured the frontage at their property and refused their application for a vehicle crossover. Mr and Mrs B say the Council has not measured to the correct boundary position and the lack of a crossover has an impact on their daily lives and mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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

5. I have considered the information Mrs B provided when she made this complaint. I sent a draft decision to Mr and Mrs B and considered the comments they made in reply before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. In 2016, Mr and Mrs B applied to the Council for permission to construct a vehicle crossover so they could park at the front of their property. Mrs B has explained they measured the frontage and were satisfied it met the four metre minimum requirement in the Council’s policy. As they expected the Council to grant permission, Mr and Mrs B installed a drive.
7. The Council refused Mr and Mrs B’s application on the grounds the frontage measured 3.95 metres. Mrs B says the Council measured to the wrong place.
8. The Council’s decision to refuse Mr and Mrs B’s application was made over 12 months ago and the complaint is therefore late. The restriction in paragraph 3 applies and the Ombudsman will not normally investigate late complaints.
9. I do not consider there are any good reasons for the Ombudsman to exercise his discretion and now investigate this late complaint. This is because further consideration of the matter is unlikely to find fault with the way the Council made its decision to refuse Mr and Mrs B’s application. An officer visited the property, took measurements, took photographs to record the measurement and considered the requirements of the vehicle crossover policy. The Council and Mr and Mrs B disagree about whether a concrete strip forms part of the pavement or is Mr and Mrs B’s land. This is not a matter the Ombudsman could resolve.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons for the Ombudsman to exercise his discretion and now investigate.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman