Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 22-002-851 Sector Transport And Highways Category Other Decided 15 June 2022

View Kingston upon Thames Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to allow Ms X to install a vehicle crossover at her property. This is because there is no evidence fault affected the Council’s decision.

The complaint

The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, complains the Council did not consider her application for a vehicle crossover at her property with compassion and did not consider her extenuating circumstances whereby she has a job which requires her to have access to her vehicle 24 hours a day and she cannot currently park on the driveway already installed at her property.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. We cannot question whether an organisation’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) 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 Ms X and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Ms X applied for a vehicle crossover to be installed at her property. However, the Council refused the application because it would have involved the removal of a parking bay and an amendment to the existing Traffic Management Order covering her road, contrary to its crossover policy.

Ms X says the Council failed to take into account her own personal circumstances which include working in a job whereby 24 hour a day access to her car is required.

It is not our role to act as an appeal body. We cannot question decisions councils make if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information.

In this case the Council’s crossover policy states: “In considering applications, it is the site that will be considered against our policy requirements, not the vehicle size or type, or the occupier circumstances.” Therefore, I see no fault in the way the Council applied its policy and came to its decision.

The Council’s decision is disappointing for Ms X but I have seen no evidence to suggest fault affected it.

Final decision

We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is no evidence fault affected the Council’s decision.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-012-307 Other
25-013-319 Other
25-027-475 Other
25-019-316 Other
25-004-771 Other
View all decisions for this organisation