Summary: Ms X complained the Council installed an unsuitable dropped kerb which is not fit for purpose and does not reflect the information on its website. Ms X said she cannot safely park her car on the drive without mounting the kerb, this has caused her distress. The Council failed to follow its own guidance and has not installed the same style of dropped kerb as the others on Ms X’s road. The Council agreed to consider the suitability of the dropped kerb and whether changes are needed.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council installed an unsuitable dropped kerb which is not fit for purpose. The Councils website says it will choose materials and kerbs to match dropped kerbs on the road. Ms X thought the Council would install a dipped style kerb like her neighbours, instead it installed a quadrant style kerb. Ms X says this is unsuitable due to the narrowness of the road. It is impossible to park on the drive without mounting the kerb which has caused damage to the family car. This has caused Ms X distress. Ms X would like the Council to change the quadrant kerb to a dipped kerb or provide an alternative solution.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended).
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. As part of the investigation I have considered the following:
• The complaint and the documents provided by the complainant.
• Documents provided by the Council and its comments in response to my enquiries.
• Information provided on the Council's website.
5. Ms X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s policies and procedures

6. The Council’s website explains what a dropped kerb is and how to apply for one.
7. It says a dropped kerb enables vehicles to cross the public pavement to access a private driveway. It allows safe, off-road parking and can add value to property.
8. The dropped kerb is part of the public highway and is maintained by the council.
9. A standard width crossing is 2.75 metres. The website says on narrow roads, the minimum width of the dropped kerb may need to be more than this.
10. The website says dropped kerbs are constructed of either grasscrete, tarmac, slabs, block paving or concrete. The majority are constructed in tarmac.
11. The website shows pictures of the different types of dropped kerbs. These are dipped, radius and quadrant style.
• The picture of the dipped style dropped kerb shows a wedge shaped opening, narrowing towards the entrance of the driveway. The height of the kerb drops gradually.
• The picture of the radius style dropped kerb shows a rounded opening, narrowing towards the entrance of the driveway. The height of the kerb drops gradually.
• The picture of the quadrant style is rectangular. The entrance to the driveway is the same width as the driveway. It has a small round kerb edge which is the same height as the kerb, it does not drop gradually as the dipped and radius style.
12. The website says the Council chooses materials and kerbs to match the majority of kerbs already in the road.
13. The Council charges a non-refundable application fee of £103 which includes inspecting the proposed location. The typical costs of a standard width crossing is between £2,000 and £4,000. This includes an administration fee of £296, materials and labour.
14. On receiving the application fee, the Council will inspect the area outside the property (the applicant does not need to be present) and provide a quote within 20 working days. The applicant has nine months to accept the quote and pay from the date on the letter. Installation takes a minimum of 16 weeks from receipt of payment. Non-standard work will take over 20 weeks.

What happened

15. I have summarised below the key events; this is not intended to be a detailed account.
16. Ms X lives on a cul-de-sac. The road is narrow with high kerb edges. The properties that have dropped kerbs are all dipped style.
17. Ms X applied for a dropped kerb in September 2022 online.
18. When she applied, there was no choice to select a style of kerb. Ms X told me she thought the Council would install a dipped kerb to match her neighbours, as this is what the website said. The records show Ms X asked for a standard width.
19. After she ordered the dropped kerb, Ms X said the Council came to measure up and sent her a quote for around £4,000. The quote did not mention style or materials. There was no discussion. In conversation with me, Ms X said she does not know much about kerbs and trusted the professionals to do their job.
20. The Council installed the dropped kerb in February 2023. It installed a quadrant style. This has high, sharp edges to the kerb and is the same width as the drive. The Council said it installed a slightly wider crossing of 2.86 metre rather than the standard 2.75 metre.
21. The Councils records show Ms X was not happy with the installation and requested an inspection. The records state ‘Crossing passed. Customer is damaging her wheels every time she now park a street away.’
22. Ms X complained to the Council late 2023. She said there was no adequate access despite the dropped kerb being installed. She said the road is narrow with high kerb edges and the new dropped quadrant style kerb also has high sharp edges. She said it is not possible to turn into the driveway without the wheels climbing the steep kerb on both sides of the drive. This has damaged the family car. Ms X considers this would not be an issue if the Council had installed a dipped kerb, the same as all the others on the road. These have slopping wider edges at the entrance of the driveway which provides better access.
23. The Council issued stage one and two responses. It said Ms X applied for a standard width dropped kerb and the Council had installed this. The inspector passed the completed works. The Council said it cannot make changes. It said Ms X should have applied for a wider crossing if this is what she needed.
24. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman in June 2023. She said she thought the Council would install a dipped style dropped kerb after reading the information on the internet which said the Council would match materials and style to the majority of other kerbs. She said she does not think the Council understood this in her complaint as the response focused on the width of the dipped kerb and not the style. Ms X told me when the inspector visited the property, he said he saw the problem immediately, but the Council did not follow this up. Ms X said the Council failed to provide an adequate service and installed an unsuitable dropped kerb which is not fit for purpose. Ms X said if she had known the Council was going to install a quadrant style kerb, she would have asked for the dipped style, or requested a wider crossing.
25. In response to my enquiries, the Council said the inspector approved the kerb to say the workmanship was satisfactory. It does not have any records of conversation between the inspector and Ms X.

Analysis

26. The Council’s website says when it installs a new dropped kerb, it will match the style and materials to the majority of other dropped kerbs on the road. All the dropped kerbs on the road are dipped. This led Ms X to believe her dropped kerb would also be dipped, so it matched all the other dropped kerbs on the road. The Council installed a quadrant style kerb. The Council did not follow the information it publishes on its website. This is fault.
27. In response to my enquiries, the Council said to preserve the greenery and street scene, it decided footway crossings which consist of grass verges should be replaced with grass blocks. The manufacturers drawings show these are installed at right angles and cannot be cut. For this reason, quadrant style kerbing was selected. A dipped kerb requires a triangular area directly behind them which is not possible with the grass blocks. Whilst I understand the reasoning behind the Council’s decision, this is not detailed on its website. If the Council is encouraging the preservation of greenery and the street scene and enabling this by using grass blocks for dropped kerbs, it should refer to this on its website. Alternatively, it could have explained this to Ms X as part of the application and inspection process. It did not, this is fault.
28. An inspector inspects the area outside the property before quoting for the work. At this point I would expect the inspector to check the specifications for the dropped kerb and ensure the design was in keeping with guidance as set out online. The inspector should also check the design, style and sizing was fit for purpose and allowed safe access. An inspector did visit the outside of the property before sending the quote to Ms X. The Council said ‘If it was unsuitable, the inspector would not have marked this up in the first place and would have informed the Council of its unsuitability.’ The Council said it installed a slightly wider crossing to make it easier to manoeuvre over the dropped kerb. The Council considered the site was suitable for a dropped kerb following the inspector’s initial visit.
29. The inspection records show Ms X was not happy with the work, she said she damages her wheels every time she tries to get on the drive. In the same sentence, it says the crossing was passed. I understand the Council said it is the workmanship that was passed, and this was nothing to do with the detail. The Council could have made further enquiries regarding the suitability of the crossing after receiving the complaint and the comments made by the inspector when they visited. Instead, it signed the works off. The Council should have done more to understand the issue.

Summary

30. The Council did not follow its own guidance on what style and materials it used when it installed Ms X’s driveway, neither did it explain this as part of the application and inspection process. All the dropped kerbs on Ms X’s road are dipped so this is what Ms X believed the Council would install after reading the information on the internet. Ms X said the driveway is not fit for purpose as she cannot manoeuvre her car on to the drive without mounting the high quadrant style kerb. She does not consider this would be an issue had the Council installed a dipped kerb, as her neighbours. This has caused Ms X distress and frustration which was made worse as she thinks the Council did not fully understand her complaint.
31. Had the Council told Ms X it was to install a quadrant style dropped kerb, Ms X said she would have applied for a wider crossing.

Injustice

32. The Council’s failure to follow the information it publishes online about the style and material of dropped kerbs has caused Ms X anxiety and frustration as she is worried the dropped kerb is not fit for purpose, is unusable and causing damage to her vehicle. It also meant she lost the opportunity to consider alternatives and request a wider crossing when she applied. This is her injustice.

Agreed action

33. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council should arrange for an inspector to visit the property and discuss the issues with Ms X, assess if the dropped kerb is fit for purpose and allows safe access to the driveway without mounting the kerb. If the inspector decides Ms X’s car cannot safely use the dropped kerb, the Council should consider what it can do to improve the situation and discuss suggested changes with Ms X and implement these free of charge.
34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

35. The Ombudsman has found the Council at fault for failing to follow its own guidance about the style and material of dropped kerbs.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman