The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a vehicle crossover licence. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr B, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a vehicle crossover licence. Mr B says similar properties nearby have been allowed a crossover. Mr B also says the Council’s decision was based on outdated guidance and the Council did not visit him before making its decision. Mr B says he would like the vehicle crossover so he can provide a charging point for an electric vehicle, which is what recent national and Council guidance encourages. Mr B would like the Council to grant his application.
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 B and the Council’s guidance on vehicle crossover applications, which is available on the Council website.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council refused Mr B’s application because the crossover would be placed within an existing layby. The Council said this is not in line with current Council guidance.
The information does not suggest the Council’s decision was affected by fault.
The Council was correct to say the crossover would be placed within an existing layby. So, I find a site visit would not have affected the Council’s assessment of Mr B’s application.
The Council’s decision is in line with its current guidance on vehicle crossover applications. This was the relevant policy for Mr B’s application. The guidance is up to date because it was reviewed by the Council in October 2021.
Mr B says there are vehicle crossovers nearby which are within a layby. The Council may have allowed such crossovers in the past, or these crossovers may have been constructed without the permission of the Council. This does not mean the Council was at fault for refusing Mr B’s application.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman