Archive has 21 results
-
Norfolk County Council (19 009 749)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 30-Oct-2019
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s failure to maintain a public right of way he uses. This is because the right of way has now been cleared and an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 09-Oct-2019
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with her compensation claim. This is because the Upper Tribunal is the appropriate body to consider Mrs B’s claim and we would not consider a complaint about delay by a council dealing with a compensation claim if we are not considering the claim itself.
-
Derbyshire County Council (18 006 872)
Statement Upheld Rights of way 06-Sep-2019
Summary: Mrs C says the Council failed to ensure a local footpath was free from obstructions and to prevent the use of dangerous machinery on it. The Council was at fault for delay and for refusing to process Mrs C’s notification of obstruction. This caused distress to Mrs C. The Council should process this notification and also complete the footpath diversion process to allow Mrs C’s objections to be heard.
-
Derbyshire County Council (18 017 922)
Statement Not upheld Rights of way 27-Aug-2019
Summary: Mr X complains the Council will not remove an obstruction on a private road. The road is not adopted highway or a public right of way. The Council is not at fault as it has no power to remove the obstruction.
-
Hertfordshire County Council (18 016 719)
Statement Upheld Rights of way 15-Jul-2019
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council increased the width of a public footpath that runs along the boundary of her home without consultation. The Council was not at fault for the way it widened the footpath. There was some fault in the way it dealt with a signpost but this has been put right.
-
Mid Suffolk District Council (19 002 769)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 10-Jul-2019
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council granted planning permission and a park homes licence without ensuring the access road will be maintained. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault Council’s actions.
-
Hampshire County Council (18 019 954)
Statement Not upheld Rights of way 08-Jul-2019
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not communicated adequately with her or her solicitor about a dispute involving a gate, which she installed on a road adjacent to her property in December 2016 after receiving a licence from it to do so. She wants it to communicate with her solicitor to resolve the matter. The Ombudsman has discontinued its investigation into her complaint. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome she desires and there is another body better placed to consider her complaint.
-
Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (18 017 991)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 21-Jun-2019
Summary: The Ombudsman found Mr H’s complaint about the way the Council responded to his report of a neighbour blocking a footpath running between their houses along the side of his garden hedge is not within his jurisdiction. This is because he took too long to complain to the Ombudsman about it.
-
Poole Borough Council (18 019 065)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 24-May-2019
Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a footpath diversion application. This is because the Council has decided to continue with an Order to divert the footpath. This will allow a right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. The Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to consider the complaint.
-
Cheshire East Council (19 000 988)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 24-May-2019
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs C’s complaint about the Council’s temporary closure of a bridleway. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.