Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s maintenance of public areas. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault and an investigation by us would not achieve a different outcome. There is also not significant enough personal injustice to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has not maintained public areas near to where he lives to the standards they were previously. He says this has meant he is no longer able to fish along the riverbank and has spoiled his enjoyment of the local area.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained to the Council about several concerns about the upkeep of the local area. He says the Council has not maintained the areas and this has meant he has not been able to enjoy the area as much as he used to.
6. An officer met Mr X on-site where he was able to show his concerns in-person. The Council compiled an action plan for some of the areas of concern and determined which areas were the Council’s responsibility.
7. The Council carried out improvements and cleaned up the riverside area and playing fields. The Council said it was not responsible for all the areas where Mr X had concerns but for those where it was responsible it provided reasoning as to what action it could and would take.
8. The Council’s investigation into Mr X’s concerns was sufficient and its response about each of the areas was clear and rational. There is not enough evidence the Council is at fault procedurally. Any investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.
9. While I understand Mr X feels strongly about these matters, we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. As a publicly funded body we must be careful how we use our resources. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, any investigation would not lead to a different outcome, and the injustice is not significant enough to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman