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

The complaint

1. Miss Y complained the Council rejected her application for a dropped kerb due to the gradient of the drive being more than 10%. Miss Y says the Council has not applied its policy fairly as her neighbour has been allowed a dropped kerb and have not used its judgement based on her circumstances.
2. Miss Y says this has caused her considerable difficulty as she is unable, without significant costs, to charge her electric vehicle at home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Miss Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss Y made an application to the council for a dropped kerb. Under the Council’s policy, which is available online, it says, an application will be rejected if “your driveway/hardstanding is steeper than 1 in 10”.
7. Consequently, Miss Y’s application was rejected by the Council because the gradient of her driveway was higher than 1 in 10, meaning it was too steep under the Council’s policy. Miss Y asked for this to be reviewed and explained her circumstances, including her care for unwell relatives, the cost of charging her vehicle outside her home and her work.
8. The Council considered Miss Y’s request and reviewed the application. It explained why it had refused the application and said that while it understood Miss Y’s reasons for wanting a dropped kerb, it would not change its decision. It also confirmed that each application as considered individually and said it would not compare different applications, such as for Miss Y’s neighbour.
9. 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. As the Council has considered the issues, its policy and relevant factors such as the gradient of the driveway, there is not enough evidence of fault in the decision-making process to justify investigating this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman