Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to take action against traders in his area who are causing environmental problems and restricting the footway with trade waste and obstructions. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s failure to take sufficient action over environmental problems caused by traders in his area who store bins and trade waste on the footway near their premises. He also complains about lack of parking enforcement and traffic in the area which affects the environment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X complained to the Council about environmental damage arising from traders storing waste for collection and bins and crates on the footway. He says this causes obstructions for pedestrians and encourages fly-tipping which the Council has not taken action over. He also complained about general matters in the area such as parking enforcement and heavy traffic.
5. Mr X made two previous complaints about these matters and in the last complaint in 2017 (16017476) we did not find fault because the Council had improved its monitoring of the traders. The shops are located some distance away from Mr X’s home and he cannot see the waste from the road where he lives.
6. The Council told Mr X that is collects trade waste form the shops 3 days a week and that they have to leave it on the frontages because there are no other sites available. The Council collects any fly-tipping which may have been carried out at the same time. The Council has street enforcement officers and enforces parking, but it has to cover the whole borough with its limited resources.
7. Mr X wants shops selling alcohol 24 hours to be closed and for parking and waiting offenders to be issued penalties on the basis of CCTV records. The Council told him that it cannot do this and that only parking enforcement officers can issue penalties. It cannot resolve all the matters which Mr X has raised because it can only react to matters when they arise.
8. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. I do not consider that the Council has failed to investigate Mr X’s complaints, but it could not realistically resolve the many issues the area which he has raised. Some of these matters do not cause any direct injustice to Mr X because they are too far away.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman