Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to deal with a straying dog. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refuses to act against a neighbour who allows their dog to roam free.

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
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information provided by Mr X and discussed his complaint with him. I also considered the Council’s responses to him and his comment on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 enables a council to issue a Community Protection Notice (CPN) in cases of irresponsible dog ownership where informal methods have proved unsuccessful. The notice can require the dog’s owner to take action to improve the dog’s behaviour and his control of it including, for example, attending dog training classes or repairing fencing to prevent the dog leaving the property.

What happened

5. Mr X complained to the Council that a neighbour allows his dog to roam free, causing a nuisance. He says the dog is not neutered and it attacked his own dog and got it pregnant when it got into his mother’s garden.
6. The Council wrote to Mr X confirming dog wardens were patrolling the area and had not found the dog.
7. Mr X moved house but continued to complain to the Council about the dog.

Assessment.

8. The Council’s website says:

“A stray dog is defined as any dog in a public place that is not under the control of its owner. Found dogs that are contained in a person’s home or garden can be collected by the Council’s dog warden and taken to XX Boarding Kennels. All reports of roaming stray dogs will be checked and patrolled by the dog warden.”

9. The Council confirmed that dog wardens have patrolled the areas in response to Mr X’s complaint and continue to do so. But they have not found the dog.
10. I understand that Mr X says the dog regularly roams free and got his own dog pregnant. And as he could not afford the vet bills Mr X has to give his own dog to the RSPCA. But the Council’s dog wardens have patrolled the area and have not seen the dog Mr X is complaining about.
11. Mr X says he has told the Council who the owner is, and it should act. The Council says without encountering the dog it cannot issue warnings to the owner as it does not have the individuals confirmed address or contact details.
12. I understand Mr X has given the dog owners name and address to the Council. But the Council have not seen the dog straying and cannot act on Mr X’s say so alone.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I will not investigate this complaint because we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. And further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman