Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Birmingham City Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 24-000-599 Sector Transport And Highways Category Parking And Other Penalties Decided 18 June 2024

View Birmingham City Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse her dropped kerb application. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

The complaint

The complainant, Miss X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for a dropped kerb. Miss X explained her property is the only one on her road impacted by the policy decision and she needs a dropped kerb due to her health problems and parking issues on her road.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended) 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), as amended, section 34(B)) We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Miss X applied to the Council for a dropped kerb. The Council refused her application because the overall dropped kerb outside her property would exceed 8.5 metres.

Miss X complained about the Council’s decision and provided information about her health issues and parking difficulties locally.

The Council explained that whilst it sympathised with Miss X’s circumstances it no longer accepts applications where the dropped kerb would exceed 8.5 metres. This is because it is trying to maintain the street scene and by allowing unlimited lengths of dropped kerbs it increases flooding as dropped kerbs offer less protection than a full height kerb.

We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council as it has made its decision in line with its published policy on dropped kerbs. This states that dropped kerbs in excess of 8.5 metres will not be granted. We are not an appeal body and it is not our role to say the Council should have made a decision that favoured Miss X’s application where there is no sign of fault in the way the decision was reached. It considered the information Miss X provided about her circumstances but upheld its decision to refuse the application in line with its policy. This is a decision the Council is entitled to make.

Final decision

We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is no sign of fault by the Council as it decided her application in line with its published policy.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Birmingham City Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-003-130 Upheld
25-020-106 Other
25-020-802 Other
25-017-497 Other
24-023-024 Other
View all decisions for this organisation