The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr B complains the Council has delayed in carrying out works to complete a dropped kerb for his property. Mr B says he has paid a significant amount of money for the works, but the Council has not followed through despite persistent chasing. The Ombudsman finds fault in the delay.
The complaint
The complainant, who I refer to as Mr B, complains the Council has not completed his dropped kerb, eight months after he made payment. He paid the Council £3,000 for the dropped and wishes for it to go ahead. However, he says the Council delayed in arranging for the works to take place. It then arranged a date for the works but did not keep to this. Mr B says he cannot get hold of anyone of the relevant people at the Council to find out why.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered the information Mr B provided and spoke to him about the complaint. I also considered information and documents the Council provided in response to our initial enquiries. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Mr B and the Council for their comments before making a final decision.
Background
In early 2022 Mr B applied for a dropped kerb outside his property. The Council approved the application. Mr B paid £3,000 for the works at the start of April 2022.
The Council’s website says that due to current demand, installation of a standard dropped kerb will take at least 16 weeks to be completed from receiving full payment of an accepted quote. In this case, 16 weeks would have been the end of July 2022.
Mr B chased the Council in June and July 2022 as it had not arranged a date for the works. The Council said there were delays due to staff holidays and other reasons. In August 2022 Mr B made a formal complaint.
The Council’s complaint response said there had been an IT issue which meant Mr B’s payment was not processed. It said it was working to clear the backlog and had requested that an order of works was issued. However, Mr B did not receive further contact.
Mr B says he has chased the Council several times. He says a council officer eventually told him the works were arranged for a date in early November 2022. However, he says he did not receive any further contact, and no one attended to complete the works. When he tried to call the Council, he could not get through to anyone and could not find out why the works did not go ahead.
Findings
I find fault in the delay in completing the dropped kerb.
The Council’s complaint response confirms there was an initial delay of more than four months in processing Mr B’s payment and placing an order of works. It says this was because of a system error. This differs from the explanation Mr B received when he chased in the two months before this. It is not clear why the Council did not pick up on the system error at an earlier point, given that Mr B had chased. However, whether it was a system error or human error, it was a service failure that was fault and led to delays initial steps being taken to arrange the works.
The Council then indicated it had arranged the works for early November. This would have been around 16 weeks after the Council’s complaint response said it had placed an order for the works. Were that the date Mr B had paid, it would have been in line with the timescales outlined on its website. But because of the earlier delay, it had already taken more than twice that long.
However, the Council did not follow through and complete the works and has not provided an explanation or alternative date to Mr B for completion. Again, I find that this is fault.
Consideration of remedy Mr B has paid the Council a significant amount of money for it to carry out works. The delay in processing this and completing the works are significant. Eight months after payment the Council has not carried out the work, not kept to timeframes, and Mr B remains in the dark about when works will take place. This causes an injustice to Mr B in terms of stress and time and trouble having to repeatedly chase the Council. I recommend the Council pay Mr B £150 to acknowledge the time and trouble caused.
Mr B wants the works to go ahead. Given the already lengthy delays, the Council should do so without further delay. I therefore recommend the Council arrange a date for completion of the works within a month of this decision. If it cannot meet this timeframe, the Council should refund Mr £150 of the cost of the works, for every month the Council does not complete these from that point on.
Agreed action
The Council has agreed to, within one month of this decision: Apologise to Mr B for the delay in completing the dropped kerb Pay Mr B £150 to recognise the time and trouble caused by the delay and having to regularly chase for an outcome Arrange a date for the dropped kerb works to be completed and communicate this to Mr B The Council has also agreed that, if it does not complete the work within a month of this decision, it will: Refund Mr B £150 of the cost of works, for each full month the dropped kerb is not completed, beyond that date The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
Final decision
The Council is at fault for the delay in carrying out works to complete Mr B’s dropped kerb.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman