Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to maintain the boundary between his property and a park. This is because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome, the courts are better placed to determine if the Council is liable for compensation for Mr X’s injury and part of Mr X’s complaint is made late.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council has failed to maintain the boundary between his property and a park despite him raising concerns in 2020. Mr X says he suffered an injury because of the Council’s negligence and seeks compensation.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)
4. 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)

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. I will not investigate the Council’s actions going back to 2020. This is because Mr X’s complaint going back to this period is made late and I see no good reason why he could not have complained sooner.
8. The Council did inspect the boundary of Mr X’s property and the park more recently. It accepts that it delayed carrying out work to the area. I will not investigate this element of Mr X’s complaint. This is because doing so would not lead to a different outcome. The Council has since carried out work to the vegetation, removed barbed wire and plans to carry out work to repair minor damage to the fence. It has apologised to Mr X for the delay in carrying out the work which is an appropriate response.
9. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council’s inaction caused him injury. We cannot determine liability claims for personal injury or damage to property, and nor can we award compensation or damages. These are legal claims which the courts are better placed to consider. The Ombudsman will therefore not investigate Mr X’s complaint as it is reasonable to expect him to pursue a court remedy instead.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because investigation would not lead to a different outcome, the courts are better placed to determine if the Council is liable for compensation for Mr X’s injury and part of Mr X’s complaint is made late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman