Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a fall she had in a Council car park. It is a claim of Council negligence and liability for her personal injury. These are legal issues only a court can decide, if the Council’s insurer has already denied liability or does so in future. It would not be unreasonable for Mrs X to take her claim to court to pursue the legal findings and compensation she seeks.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council:
1. failed to grit one of its car parks in icy weather;
2. incorrectly decided to allow public access to the car park despite its condition;
3. failed to warn the public about the icy state of the car park.
2. Mrs X fell in the car park, which she says caused her painful injuries leaving her unable to do basic tasks for herself or work for six weeks. She wants the Council to admit it was wrong to open the car park and compensate her for her injuries and the impacts they had on her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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

5. I considered information from Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. At its core, Mrs X’s complaint is a claim of negligence by the Council, leading to her personal injury. She claims the Council was negligent in not gritting the car park, or not closing it to the public, or not warning her and other users of its condition, and that this negligence led to her injuries. This is a claim that the Council is legally liable for her fall and the harm she sustained in its car park. We cannot decide and make rulings on claims of negligence and liability for personal injury. These are legal matters only insurers and the courts can decide.
7. Mrs X may wish to pursue her claim with the Council’s insurers if she has not already done so. The Council gave Mrs X the email address for making an insurance claim against it in January 2023.
8. If Mrs X has lodged an insurance claim with the Council and it has been rejected, or it is rejected in future, this would mean the legal issues raised here could only then be determined by a court. It would not be unreasonable for Mrs X to pursue her claim at court because it is the only body which would be able to decide the legal liability and negligence issues. It would also not be unreasonable for her to go to court because she is seeking compensation from the Council for her injuries. We may only make recommendations to councils and do not provide compensation payments, but courts make binding rulings and can reward compensation.
9. As another part of her requested remedy, Mrs X wants the Council to admit it should not have opened the car park at the time she fell. This issue is one of her allegations of negligence by the Council, which she may make in her submissions to the insurers and at court if required. It would be for the insurers and/or court to consider this point if raised in her insurance claim or legal case.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• it is a claim of negligence and legal liability for personal injury against the Council which only its insurers or a court may determine; and
• if the Council’s insurers have rejected her claim, or do so in future, it would not be unreasonable for Mrs X to take her claims to court as it would be the only body which could make the legal findings and award the compensation she seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman