The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse Ms X’s application for a dropped kerb. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Ms X complains the Council has been inconsistent in refusing her application for a dropped kerb because the work would take place too close to a tree when it has granted access to others in her locale in the same situation.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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) 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))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s response to her complaint.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council refused Ms X’s application for a dropped kerb because of the proximity of a tree at the front of her property.
In response to Ms X’s complaint that other residents in her locale who also had trees close to their properties had been given permission to install dropped kerbs, the Council said each site is considered individually, and decisions are made based on individual circumstances and site conditions. It explained in her case officers had decided the proposed access was too close to the tree in question and took into account that her property already had a means of access. It said that because of the width of the frontage of the property, there was no alternative for an access in a different location.
It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants disagree. We cannot question council decisions if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. While the Counsil’s decision on her application is disappointing for Ms X, there is no evidence to suggest fault affected it.
Ms X has referred to the Council in its review of the case as stating that it could not agree to the removal of a healthy tree when she had never suggested this. However, the suggestion about the possible removal of the tree and its replacement planted elsewhere if it was damaged during works came from the councillor who had contacted officers about Ms X’s application on her behalf and it was to this point the Council responded.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman