Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a dropped kerb application at a neighbouring property and for failing to respond to reports of illegal parking. We do not find fault with how the Council considered the dropped kerb application. We find the Council at fault for not responding to Miss X’s reports of illegal parking, causing uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and respond to Miss X’s reports.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about how the Council decided to grant permission for a dropped kerb at a neighbouring property and how it has responded to reports of illegal parking on the footpath as a result of this. Miss X says this resulted in dangerous driving and parking.

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. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and policy

7. The Council’s website sets out how it considers applications for vehicle access, crossovers and dropped kerbs. This explains a proposal for new access or to extend existing access will need to satisfy both planning and highway requirements. It explains planning permission is not required unless certain conditions apply. The guidance makes clear it is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure any planning permission is in place as if it is subsequently found to be required the applicant may have to arrange to reinstate the original surface.
8. The guidance says on receipt of the application the Council will review this to determine its suitability and will write back to the applicant with the outcome.
9. The guidance sets out the design criteria for the formulation of vehicular access or dropped kerbs and explains vehicles must be parked completely off the highway.

What happened

10. I have summarised below some key events leading to Miss X’s complaint. While I have considered everything submitted, this is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
11. In 2024 Miss X’s neighbour applied to the Council for permission install a dropped kerb at her property. The application included details of the contractor who would complete the work, and the work they intended to complete.
12. The Council considered the application and wrote to Miss X’s neighbour to confirm it had approved it. This was subject to the condition that the Council be notified one week in advance of the work completing so it could inspect the work while it was in progress. This also asked that the Council be notified upon completion of the work.
13. The Council’s records show Miss X’s neighbour notified it prior to the work starting and once it was completed. The Council considered the work that had been completed and was satisfied it was in accordance with the approved application.
14. Miss X complained to the Council as she said the decision to approve the dropped kerb resulted in a loss of on-street parking. Miss X said the Council had failed to follow its own policy properly and said her neighbour did not have a proper surface suitable to be used as a driveway to park their car. Miss X explained since the dropped kerb had been installed there had been persistent parking on the footpath which obstructed access and provided photographic evidence of this.
15. The Council responded to explain it had considered Miss X’s neighbour’s application and decided it met the criteria for vehicle access to be approved. The Council thanked Miss X for alerting it to parking on the footpath and said it had now passed this to its highways team for consideration.

Analysis

16. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. Our role is not to consider whether a dropped kerb application should have been approved or not. We look at whether there was fault in how a council made its decision. If we decide there was no fault in its decision-making process, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome. We cannot uphold a complaint simply because a person disagrees with a council’s decision.
17. The Council received an application from Miss X’s neighbour for a dropped kerb and considered this against its usual criteria before approving it. I understand Miss X disagrees with the Council’s decision, but I have seen no evidence of fault in how it considered the application.
18. Miss X has said her neighbour does not have a suitable driveway for parking on and she feels the kerb should be put back to how it was previously. However, the Council’s records show it was satisfied the dropped kerb was completed in line with the application it approved, and there was no specific condition relating to the driveway so I cannot find it at fault here.
19. In her complaint to the Council, Miss X explained there had been dangerous and illegal parking since the dropped kerb was completed and provided photographs to evidence this. The Council acknowledged Miss X’s report and said it had passed this to its highways team to consider. However, the Council has not provided me with any evidence to show how it followed up on Miss X’s report or what action it took to address this. This amounts to fault and creates uncertainty around what action, if any, should be taken to address the parking Miss X reported, which is fault.

Back to top

Action

20. To remedy the injustice set out above, the Council should carry out the following actions within one month:
• Provide a written apology to Miss X for not providing a substantive response to her report of dangerous and illegal parking. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Consider Miss X’s reports of dangerous and illegal parking, along with the evidence she has provided, and write to her with the outcome of its investigation into this.
21. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

22. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman