Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s request that the Council should ban people from walking dogs in public spaces. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s response after he said it should stop people from walking dogs on the streets and in public places. Mr X says the Council should ban the walking of dogs in public spaces.

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 an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s response. I considered comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

4. Mr X lives in the Midlands. He contacted the Council to say it should ban dog walking in public because of the associated problem of dog fouling. He suggested people should have house-based pets such as hamsters.
5. In response the Council explained that dog walking is a normal activity and most people behave responsibly and pick up any dog waste. It said Enforcement Officers patrol and can issue Fixed Penalty Notices. The Council also said that it puts up warning notices in problem areas and reports any dog waste that is found to the cleaning team.
6. Mr X is dissatisfied with the response and that the Council declined to provide any further responses. He says the streets are marred by people allowing their dogs to foul the streets which is a disgusting activity and one that represents a public indecency. He wants the Council to ban dog walking in all public places.

Assessment

7. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. There is no policy or requirement for the Council to ban dog walking which is a legal activity within the UK. A council can, in some circumstances, decide that in a specified area dogs must be kept on a lead or it can ban dogs from a children’s play area. But, it does not have the power to ban dog walking from all public spaces. This is an issue Mr X would need to raise with his MP.
8. I also will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. Mr X lives about 125 miles from London and, while he says he may wish to visit, there is nothing to suggest he is affected, on a regular basis, by dog walking in this London borough.

Back to top

Final decision

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman