Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the report Mr X made to the Council regarding scaffolding near his home because the complaint is late and there is no good reason to investigate. We will not investigate the Council’s complaint response because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to take action or respond to a report he made about scaffolding near his home. He also complained that the Council’s complaint response was not accurate and did not address the concerns he raised.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X approached the Council in 2024 about some scaffolding near his home he said was dangerous. The Council said it would inspect the scaffolding, but it would not report back to Mr X as it could not discuss building control with anyone other than the property owner.
8. In 2025, Mr X made several complaints related to the scaffolding including the Council’s failure to take enforcement action, respond to his emails or provide updates on the situation. He was also unhappy the person he spoke with in 2024, provided the initial complaint response he received, and he felt the Council did not properly respond to his complaint.
9. The Council confirmed it investigated the scaffolding in 2024 and carried out site visits following this. The Council did not find cause for concern or a health and safety breach. It reiterated that it would not discuss details of the building with Mr X and explained that the officer he spoke with was the best person to respond to his complaint as they had knowledge of the matter.
10. Mr X remains unhappy with the Council’s failure to update him or carry out actions promised in 2024 and wants us to find it at fault. The Ombudsman will not investigate matters that are over 12 months old at the point they come to us, unless there are good reasons to do so. Mr X raised these issues in 2024 and so it would have been reasonable for him to approach us about these parts of the complaint much sooner. There is no good reason to investigate.
11. Mr X remains unhappy with the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action regarding the scaffolding, respond to his emails and the quality of its investigation. The Council has provided Mr X with clear and detailed responses outlining its actions, the decisions it has made as well as the reasons it has made these decisions. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions or the way it has responded to his complaint. An investigation would therefore be unlikely to result in finding fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the report Mr X made to the Council regarding scaffolding near his home because the complaint is late. We will not investigate the Council’s complaint response because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman