Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to a property because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to go to court about the matter. Also, the court, along with insurers, are better placed to consider this complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained that a contractor, he believes was working on a housing development supported by the Council, parked heavy machinery on his property’s forecourt without permission.
2. Mr Y says this caused damage to the surface on the forecourt which has affected the business there. He is seeking payment for the repairs needed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 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 another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The legislation from which the Ombudsman takes their power also places some restrictions on what we may investigate. One of these concerns negligence claims about damage to property or personal injury. These are claims where a person says they or their property has been damaged as a result of actions, or a lack of, for which they say the person they are claiming against is responsible for. This is the issue Mr Y has raised with us.
7. We cannot determine liability claims for negligence. These are legal claims which may only be determined by insurers or the courts.
8. Consequently, any claim for damages, such as costs for repairs to the forecourt of his property, which Mr Y considers the Council to be responsible for, are matters more appropriately dealt with by the courts and insurers, than through the Ombudsman. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.
9. There might be some cost to court action. However, that does not mean it is unreasonable to take court action. There is often financial assistance to those of a low income from HM Courts and Tribunal Service. Also, reasonable adjustments can be made for access to the service if necessary. It is therefore reasonable for Mr Y to be expected to use his right to go to court about this matter. We will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to go to court about the matter. Also, the court, along with insurers, are better placed to consider this complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman