Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with an outbreak of Avian Botulism in the complainant’s local park. This is because it is unlikely he will find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, has complained about how the Council has dealt with her concerns about an outbreak of Avian Botulism in her local park.

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
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous response by the Council.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the complaint and the Council’s responses. I invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision and considered the comments she made in response.

Back to top

What I found

4. Ms X contacted the Council as she was concerned that her local lake and park were infested with Avian Botulism. She says there are several steps the Council can take to prevent and treat the infected lake, but it has not done any of these. Ms X says the matter is made worse by members of the public feeding the waterfowl, however the Council is not taking any action to education people. Ms X says the park is unsafe to use and the lake is toxic.
5. Ms X believes the Council should clean and oxygenate the lake and try to stop people feeding the birds. She also says she should be compensated as she pays a high level of council tax and the Council is failing to make her local park a safe and pleasant environment.
6. The Council says it has considered Ms X’s suggestions and believes the best way to deal with the matter is to educate people. Following Ms X’s complaint, it put up temporary signs around the lake to discourage people from feeding the birds bread. It says these will be replaced with permanent signs. Ms X is unhappy with the Council’s response and says it has not addressed her concerns. She argues that the water in the lake is still toxic and the Council has not stopped people from feeding the birds. She also says that the temporary signs fell down after a few days and the Council has still not put up any permanent signs to educate people so future outbreaks can be prevented.

Assessment

7. I will not start an investigation into Ms X’s complaint as it is unlikely I would find fault by the Council.
8. Ms X says the Council has not taken sufficient steps to deal with the outbreak of Avian Botulism in her local park. However, it has considered the suggestions she has made and decided the best way to deal with the matter is to educate the public by putting signs up at the lake. It also sent Ms X the draft designs for the proposed signs and has made changes to reflect some of the comments she has previously made. The Council says the signs are due to be put up in the park very shortly.
9. I understand Ms X says the Council should take further steps to deal with the issue. But the Council did consider Ms X’s suggestions and was entitled to decide that placing signs in the park was the most appropriate action to take. Therefore, it is unlikely I could find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely he would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman