Archive has 37 results
-
North Yorkshire County Council (20 011 183)
Statement Not upheld Rights of way 14-Sep-2021
Summary: Mr C complains the Council has failed to ensure the public can fully use the public rights of way network in his local area which means he and other residents cannot properly access them. We have found no evidence of fault by the Council.
-
Buckinghamshire Council (21 000 823)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 13-Sep-2021
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway encroachment.
-
Richmondshire District Council (21 005 584)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 07-Sep-2021
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a Footpath Diversion Order following a planning application. This complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion and investigate the matter now.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 31-Aug-2021
Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint which was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner. Only the Courts could make a determination about any legal breach of disability discrimination legislation.
-
Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (21 004 766)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 18-Aug-2021
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to progress an application for footpaths to be turned into bridleways. The complainant has already appealed to the Secretary of State.
-
Staffordshire County Council (20 014 126)
Statement Upheld Rights of way 10-Aug-2021
Summary: Mr X is acting on behalf a bridleway association. He has made a complaint about the Council for failing to determine a number of map modification applications which concern public rights of way. The Ombudsman has found fault that the Council has failed to determine the applications as directed by the Secretary of State. That said, we cannot provide the outcome Mr X wants as the Council has a plan in place for addressing its backlog and we cannot direct its financial resources in this respect. Further, we do not consider the complainant has suffered a personal and significant injustice by reason of the fault by the Council.
-
Lancashire County Council (21 003 889)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 10-Aug-2021
Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint that the Council has refused to replace barriers originally installed in 1997 which had restricted the use of a footpath. This is because we would not be able to find the Council was at fault when it went ahead and removed the barriers and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
-
Surrey County Council (21 003 351)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 22-Jul-2021
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has failed to cut back and maintain hedges affecting local footpaths. There is no Council fault in deciding what action to take and no injustice caused to Mr X.
-
Westminster City Council (21 003 067)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 14-Jul-2021
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about repairs to a pavement. We have used the general discretion the law gives us to decide not to investigate this complaint because neither the alleged fault nor the claimed injustice merit investigation.
-
Wakefield City Council (20 010 225)
Statement Upheld Rights of way 06-Jul-2021
Summary: Mr B complains the Council have not consulted properly about access to land before replacing a gate on a cycle route. The Council did not consult properly before it replaced the gate. Mr B and other cyclists have lost the opportunity to comments on the changes and have suffered a loss of access. The Council has agreed to consult on the changes, retake its decision and issue guidance to staff.