Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to install bollards on the grass verge close to her dropped kerb and to tarmac the footway in front of her property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to install bollards on the grass verge near to her dropped kerb and to replace the concrete footway with tarmac after she originally paid for her dropped kerb to be concrete. Mrs X says the bollards are in the wrong place as she now has less space to access her driveway and due to her neck pain and limited movement she has to carry out multiple manoeuvres to enter and exit her driveway. Mrs X says she cannot afford to pay to extend her dropped kerb. She would like the Council to remove the bollards and tarmac over the grassed verges.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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 provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X complained to the Council about the matters set out in paragraph 1, above.
8. In its complaint responses, the Council explained why it took the action it did. It installed the bollards on highway land in locations where illegal driving over the footway could occur and to prevent damage to the newly installed footway.
9. It explained it needed to replace the entire existing footway in order to level it out. It chose to use tarmac for reasons including ease of maintenance and compatibility around trees. This was a matter for the Council to decide. It explained that whilst Mrs X had paid for the dropped kerb, the payment was for the footway to be strengthened so she could drive onto her driveway. She did not purchase the footway. This remained the property of the Council. It said it decided to maintain the grass verges in line with its policy to maintain amenity areas. Removing the grass verge and replacing it with tarmac would not be in line with its policy.
10. The Council told Mrs X it would not remove the bollards and that doing so would result in Mrs X driving illegally on an area where driving is not permitted and damaging a Council asset. It confirmed it had inspected the area following her complaint and it found it to be satisfactory. It advised Mrs X to consider applying for an extension of her crossover which would result in the removal of the bollards. It also referred Mrs X’s difficulties in accessing her driveway to the Safer Roads team to consider.
11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because, whilst I acknowledge she is unhappy with the Council’s decisions, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council here to warrant an investigation. It has explained why it installed the bollards and why they will not be removed. The choice of material for the new footway is a decision the Council is entitled to assess and decide. Whilst Mrs X previously had a wider area to access her driveway this was an area it was not legal for her to drive on.
12. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at the Council’s decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decision. I have seen no evidence of such fault here and I therefore cannot question or criticize it.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman