Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about damage to her property by a council employee. This is because it is reasonable for her to seek compensation using the legal options available. There is also not enough evidence of injustice to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains a council employee damaged a glazed pot while mowing the communal lawns outside her property.

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:

• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I also gave Mrs X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before issuing a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mrs X says a council employee damaged a glazed pot while mowing the communal lawns outside her property. She wants the Council to reimburse her for the damage.
6. The Ombudsman does not look at all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate, we need to consider if there is another body better placed to deal with the complaint. We also need to assess the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the complaints we consider the most serious.
7. The role of the Ombudsman is to consider complaints about administrative fault. We cannot establish liability in complaints involving damage to property. Claims for damage to property are a matter for the Council’s insurers and, ultimately, for the courts.
8. Mrs X should make a formal claim to the Council for the damages she says its employee caused. If the Council denies liability, she could make a claim for damages in the small claims court. I consider it would be reasonable for her to do so. This is because the cost of such a claim is relatively low, and only the court can decide if the Council has been negligent and should pay damages. These are not issues the Ombudsman can decide.
9. Even if it were not for the options available to Mrs X, an investigation by the Ombudsman would not be appropriate. While I understand Mrs X is upset by the damage she says the Council’s employee caused, the injustice is not significant enough to warrant the Ombudsman’s involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because it is reasonable for her to seek compensation using the legal options available, and there is not enough evidence of injustice to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman