Summary: We will not investigate Mr X complaint about restricted access for mobility scooters in and around the community and about delay in the Council processing his request for equipment. This is because there is no ongoing significant injustice and an investigation would not lead to any worthwhile outcomes.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about restricted access for mobility scooters in and around the community. He also complains about delay in the Council processing his request for a stairlift, an overbed grab handle, and a rail in the rear garden.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In its complaint response, the Council explained it did not receive any referral or requests for a stairlift, overbed grab handle, or rail in the garden, for Mr X. The Council said if it had, it would have processed it.
6. Mr X has since confirmed he had installed a rail himself in the garden and in the bedroom to assist with bed transfers. Mr X also confirmed he no longer wanted a stairlift. Therefore, an investigation is not justified as there is no ongoing significant injustice.
7. Mr X complained to the Council about some overgrown hedges and verges which obstructed his way when he was in his mobility scooter. He also noted there were some bollards that blocked his way.
8. The Council explained it had inspected the hedges and verges and confirmed they belonged to private housing. The Council said its highways team would send out letters to residents and ask them to maintain the hedges. The Council also confirmed it would inspect the bollards.
9. An investigation is not justified as it would not lead to any worthwhile outcomes. This is because the Council has no responsibility for private hedges and verges and has taken appropriate action to ask the private residents to maintain them.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no ongoing significant injustice and an investigation would not lead to any worthwhile outcomes.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman