Approved drop kerb application reversed

R3en_J

Hi all,
I applied for a dropped kerb in front of my house, it was approved by the council/Essex highways, sprayed up and stats pack sent through.
I was made aware that one of the neighbours wasn’t happy and he had emailed councillors & urged other neighbours to do the same etc (note, nobody came to speak to me to ask about it.) On this information I called highways who said that if it’s already been approved there’s no appeals process to get it reversed and to continue. I paid my contractor. Work hasn’t commenced yet but have had an email from highways today to say that as there’s communal parking in front of the house and due to a number of complaints / objections they have declined the application and will refund me.
I’ve put in a complaint with my reasons for the application.
I wonder if anyone has come across this as it seems to be a scenario that the people at Essex highways and contractors have not come up against. Initial rejection yes, but not an approval being reversed because of jealous neighbours!
The application will be freeing up space in the communal area (which is highways property / original land owner)
Does anyone have any advice on what to do next?
Thanks in advance.

jk0

Crack on and do the work, and make believe you never got the email?

Aylesbury_Duck

Have a look at their process to see if they are allowed to reverse a decision and if so, under what circumstances. If they've gone against that process, write to them to complain and ask to restore the original decision. If they're allowed to change their decision, it would be down to you to appeal it or submit a new, revised application that has a better chance of succeeding.

Section106

R3en_J wrote: »

...I was made aware that one of the neighbours wasn’t happy and he had emailed councillors & urged other neighbours to do the same etc (note, nobody came to speak to me to ask about it.) On this information I called highways who said that if it’s already been approved there’s no appeals process to get it reversed and to continue. I paid my contractor. Work hasn’t commenced yet but have had an email from highways today to say that as there’s communal parking in front of the house and due to a number of complaints / objections they have declined the application and will refund me....

The relevant legislation is Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/184

Subsection 5 details the matters to which the Highway Authority shall have regard to when exercising their powers under Section 184. None of the matters include "complaints or objections from the neighbours".

Subsections 11 and 12 are relevant in a situation like yours where the resident has requested a crossover. Neither subsection makes any provision for a previously approved request to be revoked due to complaints by neighbours.

The Council's own terms and conditions and criteria (which wouldn't override the legislation anyway) don't make any mention of neighbours being consulted or able to veto an application.
https://www.essexhighways.org/applications/vehicle-crossings-dropped-kerbs/vehicle-crossing-criteria.aspx

Councils making decisions have to follow rules. Firstly any applicable legislation, secondly any policies they have adopted. The decisions and actions they take also have to be things they have the power to do. Unless legislation allows a council to refuse a crossover application because the neighbours object (I don't know of any such legislation) then the decision is what is known as ultra vires.

This is what I would do -
1) Print off or save a copy of all relevant pages from the council's website (especially the T&C's and criteria)
2) Write to the Council's Monitoring Officer explaining (briefly) the situation and asking under what specific power the Council has (i) taken into account the comments/objections of your neighbours and (ii) Reversed the previous decision to approve your crossover request. I would refer them to Section 184(5) and the specific matters the authority should have regard to. I would also explain I was concerned the decision may have been made "ultra vires" and I intended, if the original decision is not reinstated, to make a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman as possible case of maladministration.

The council's Monitoring Officer also has the job title "Director, Legal and Assurance" which seems to be the equivalent of "County Solicitor" - i.e. the person with ultimate legal responsibility for the council. The direct link to his profile (where you can get his email address) contains his full name, so rather than posting that, here's a link to the council's list of legal people which features him at the top.
http://www.elslegal.org.uk/our-people

By the way, try to put stuff in writing rather than talking to people on the phone. If the highways officer who (correctly) told you "there’s no appeals process to get it reversed and to continue" had put that in writing (e.g. email) rather than telling you on the phone then you would now have a very important bit of evidence to use in your complaint.

(All the above is my understanding of the legal situation with crossovers, but it isn't legal advice. You should consult your own solicitor if you are unsure what action to take. However, you have a right as a resident to ask the council to explain how they have arrived at a decision and under what powers that decision has been taken)

bris

It may be that the fact they never had the proper information in the first place allows them to do it.


Communal parking where the kerb is to be dropped is a big deal and it would never have been allowed in the first place.


Whether the planning should have known about the communal parking or the applicant should have informed them is a different matter.


The downside to "just cracking on" as someone has suggested is the cost to put it back would be pretty high if it all goes belly up and they make you.

Dan-Dan

jk0 wrote: »

Crack on and do the work, and make believe you never got the email?

Even though they have replied to the council ?

"but have had an email from highways today to say that as there’s communal parking in front of the house and due to a number of complaints / objections they have declined the application and will refund me.
I’ve put in a complaint with my reasons for the application."

ktate

Did you really receive the email if so bin it some people just wont let others get on with life why do people complain about little things

Aylesbury_Duck

ktate wrote: »

Did you really receive the email if so bin it some people just wont let others get on with life why do people complain about little things

What on earth are you on about?

James1968

Communal parking is just speak for anyone can park here as there are no parking restrictions in place.

If they have reversed the decision, then point out that yours is the only vehicle to park in front of your house, so no one else will be inconvenienced by the installation of a dropped kerb.

Aylesbury_Duck

James1968 wrote: »

Communal parking is just speak for anyone can park here as there are no parking restrictions in place.

If they have reversed the decision, then point out that yours is the only vehicle to park in front of your house, so no one else will be inconvenienced by the installation of a dropped kerb.

But that’s not necessarily true. People can park there at the moment but perhaps don’t, but if OP gets a dropped kerb, no one will be able to. The council probably take the view that communal parking is an amenity for all residents and their visitors whereas a driveway only serves one house. I suspect they’ve reversed their decision because they realised they shouldn’t have granted permission in the first place, not because someone’s objected.

Section106

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

But that’s not necessarily true. People can park there at the moment but perhaps don’t, but if OP gets a dropped kerb, no one will be able to. The council probably take the view that communal parking is an amenity for all residents and their visitors whereas a driveway only serves one house. I suspect they’ve reversed their decision because they realised they shouldn’t have granted permission in the first place, not because someone’s objected.

However, as per my previous post, the matters the Council should be considering are listed in sub-section 5 of Section 184. The convenience of other residents being able to park is not one of them.

This is where the point about ultra vires comes in. A council officer might get out of bed the wrong side one day and decide to refuse to allow a crossover because of the impact on parking - but the question is whether that decision has a lawful basis. Section 184(5) appears to say not.

The only exception would be if the communal parking area is not public highway. In that case Section 184 does not apply, and it is for the owner/person responsible for the communal parking to make whatever decisions they (reasonably) want in relation to whether or not an adjoining property owner can create a new access onto their land.