The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting consent for the complainant’s neighbour to build a dropped kerb. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council granted permission for a neighbour to build a dropped kerb. He says the car lights shine into his bedroom and the engine noise is disturbing. Mr X says the Council should have ensured the parking space has no impact on his bedroom.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and the dropped kerb rules. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
People must get approval to install a dropped kerb so they can park on a drive. There is no requirement for the Council to consult neighbours. Planning permission may be needed if the property is on an A, B or C road. The Council’s dropped kerb rules do not require it to consider whether a dropped kerb would have any impact on other properties. The rules are mainly concerned with road safety, including that there should be 45 metres of clear visibility.
Mr X reported to the Council that the neighbour opposite his bungalow had installed a drive but had no dropped kerb. Mr X says the Council said, during calls, that planning permission would be required although the Council denies this was said.
The neighbour made a successful dropped kerb application. Mr X says the lights from the vehicles parked on the drive shine into his bedroom. He is also disturbed by engine noise. Mr X alleges there has been a breach of the Human Rights Act and says the Council should have ensured the parking space is away from his bedroom. He says there is a telegraph pole which means there is not 45 metres visibility.
In response to his complaint the Council explained that planning permission was not needed as the road is unclassified. It also said the neighbour had satisfied the rules for a dropped kerb. It said it could not help regarding the lights or noise and suggested Mr X speak to the neighbour. The Council said it could not act when someone was legitimately using the highway. The Council confirmed to me that during the inspection an officer checked the visibility and found that the pole only affects a small part of the line of sight and that, overall, there is good visibility for 45 metres.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The neighbour was not required to get planning permission and the Council was not required to consider any impact the dropped kerb may have on other properties. The neighbouring property met the requirements for a dropped kerb so there is no suggest of fault in the Council’s decision to grant consent. The Council had no power to require the neighbour to park in a different position.
I appreciate Mr X finds the light and noise intrusive. But many dwellings, including bungalows, are located opposite drives and dropped kerbs, and lights and engine noise are a normal by-product of using a drive.
Mr X says he was told that planning permission was needed and says the Council has refused to give him the call recordings The Council denies this was said. I do not need to pursue this because even if Mr X was wrongly told the neighbour needed planning consent this does not alter the fact that the neighbour lives on an unclassified road and does not need consent. Whatever was said during the call has no bearing on the neighbour’s application. Mr X can make a Freedom of Information/Subject Access request to the Council if he wants to hear the calls but, for the reason already explained, this would not have any bearing on the dropped kerb.
Mr X complained the Council has discriminated against him under the Human Rights Act but my view is that the Human Rights Act is not relevant to these issues.
Mr X has complained of untruths in the Council’s responses. I acknowledge Mr X may disagree with the responses, and disputes the position regarding planning permission, but I have not seen anything that requires an investigation.
Final decision
We will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman