Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his car being damaged by Council contractors. This is because this is a complaint about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains Council contractors damaged his car on two separate occasions, causing over £3000 of damage to his car. One claim has been refused and the second remains ongoing. Mr X also complains about delay in the claims being decided.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
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 provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X submitted two claims for damages for damage caused to his car by Council contractors. The first claim is made against the Council’s waste contractor, the second is against its street cleaning contractor.
8. The waste contractor denied liability and refused Mr X’s claim. The claim against the street cleaning contractor remains ongoing.
9. Mr X told the Council his insurer intends to pursue the first claim in court. He asked the Council to consider settling the claim before it proceeds to court.
10. We will not investigate Mr X’s Complaint. This is because it is a complaint about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide. We cannot decide a negligence claim. Deciding whether an organisation has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way at evidence, as only the court can, to make its findings. In addition, only a court can decide if an organisation has been negligent and so should pay damages. We cannot recommend actions or payments that ‘punish’ the Council.
11. We cannot decide whether the contractors or the Council has been negligent and have no powers to enforce an award of damages. So, we would usually expect someone in Mr X’s position to seek a remedy in the courts, directly or via his insurers. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to use his right to make a claim in the courts and it appears, from the correspondence, that this is the approach his insurer intends to take.
12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about delay in the claims being decided. We do not investigate complaints about complaint handling issues in isolation where we are not also investigating the substantive matter. This is because it is not a good use of our limited public resources for us to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman