Summary: Mr X complained about the Council disposing of land granted to it in the early 20th century for development and profit. The Ombudsman should not exercise his discretion to investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for receiving complaints. The Council transferred the land to a college in 1997 and this was a legal matter which could only be challenged in the courts.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council disposing of land for development which was bequeathed to its predecessor Council in the 1920’s. He says the land was donated to the public and that it has been sold for development for over £10 million.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X says the Council sold land which had been donated to the public and looked after by a previous Council in the 20th century. He says he has been complaining for seven years and the Council has not accepted responsibility. The land has been sold and developed in recent years for housing and a supermarket.
6. The Council says it gave the land to a further education college in 1997 when the change in legislation required it to cease administering further education colleges. The college subsequently closed down and its buildings and land were sold in 2013.
7. If Mr X wishes to challenge any breach of the covenants relating to the land he would need to do so with the party which put the land up for sale to developers in 2013. This was not the Council because it had not been responsible for it for many years by this time. He would need to seek legal advice to challenge the breach of covenants but may find he is out of time to take any action.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman should not exercise his discretion to investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for receiving complaints. The Council transferred the land to a college in 1997 and this was a legal matter which could only be challenged in the courts.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman