Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to the complainant’s concerns about fly posting where he lives. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. Also, we do not consider the complainant has suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council fails to respond or act on his repeated reports of fly posting.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X reports incidents of fly posting to the Council. The Council has advised new posters and advertisements in the area consistently. It says it works to educate businesses to use the correct form of advertising for their needs. It also confirmed it arranged for a contractor to remove excessive fly posting and record what it has removed so the Council can contact the business responsible. However, it has told Mr X it does not consider fly posting a priority.
6. The Council has told Mr X it has made its position on fly posting clear and will not communicate with him further on this matter.
7. Our role is primarily to look at the way the Council carries out its administrative functions – not to look at its spending priorities or its policy decisions which are a matter for the electorate rather than the Ombudsman. Our focus lies on the way it makes its decisions and, in the absence of fault in its processes, we cannot question the merits of its decisions. So, it would not be possible for us to investigate in a meaningful way a complaint that the Council needs to change its priorities as far as fly posting is concerned.
8. We can consider whether the Council has properly considered Mr X’s concerns, but we cannot arbitrate on his view about what should happen and the Council’s view. From the information supplied it seems that the Council has given proper thought to his reports of fly tipping and taken action it considers appropriate. We have seen no sign of procedural irregularity which would allow us to question the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen evidence of fault in the actions the Council has taken following Mr X’s reports of fly posting. Also, while Mr X may find fly posting unpleasant, we do not consider he has suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman