The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse an application for a dropped kerb. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse her application for a dropped kerb. She says she needs a dropped kerb to keep her children safe and is willing to pay for the tree to be removed or replaced.
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 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), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes photographs of the proposed site and the tree, and the dropped kerb policy. I also considered our Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X applied for a dropped kerb. The Council visited, took photographs and measured the proposed site of the dropped kerb. There is a tree close to where the proposed dropped kerb would be built. The Council declined the application due to the presence of the tree. The Council also said Ms X has access to parking at the rear of the property; Ms X says this is incorrect.
Ms X disagrees with the decision. She says she needs a dropped kerb to keep her children safe as they live on a busy road. She is willing to pay for the tree to be removed or relocated.
The tree policy says the Council will usually refuse an application for a dropped kerb where there is conflict with a street tree and where construction would involve cutting tree roots.
The Council inspected the site and took measurements. The Council decided a crossover would negatively affect the tree. It also decided there is not room for a dropped kerb if the edge of the proposed crossover was moved further from the tree. The Council’s decision reflects the policy so there is no reason to start an investigation.
The Council referred to Ms X having off-street parking which is denied by Ms X. The Council also referred to a tree scoring system which it uses to help determine if a tree could be removed or relocated. I do not know if Ms X has access to parking at the rear of the property and the tree scoring system is difficult to follow, but, despite these issues, the decision to refuse the application (because the dropped kerb would be close to a large tree) reflects the policy so there is not enough indication of fault to require an investigation.
Ms X has explained why she would like a dropped kerb but we are not an appeal body and cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with. And, the fact that someone lives on a busy road, and may have children, is not a reason for the Council to grant consent or disregard the tree policy.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman