Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters relating to land it owns which runs adjacent to Mr X’s property. This is because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of matters relating to land the Council owns which runs adjacent to his property. He says its poor communication, refusal to meet him and the unnecessary threat of legal action has caused him distress and that his property is being adversely affected by the Council’s inaction.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

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 considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In the past Mr X approached the Council to buy land adjacent to him which is owned by the Council but it declined his offer. He also complained about damage caused to his property by overgrowing trees and shrubs on the land. The Council agreed to carry out annual maintenance work to minimise encroachment onto his property.
7. More recently, Mr X erected fencing which enclosed some of the Council’s land so creating an extension to his garden. The Council told him to remove the fencing from its land or face the possibility of legal action.
8. Mr X complained to the Council about its handling of matters and the conduct of an officer involved in his case. The Council told him it had found the conduct of staff to have been appropriate and found no fault with the action taken. It told him it saw no reason to meet with him as it had explained its position on a number of occasions.
9. There is no evidence of fault by the Council which warrants an investigation by the Ombudsman. The Council has inspected the site, undertaken works it considers appropriate and asked Mr X to remove fencing which he had erected on its land.
10. Mr X says Council inaction in addressing over hanging branches and encroaching vegetation is causing damage to his property. It is open to Mr X to make an insurance claim against the Council which, if refused, he can challenge through the courts. As he has this alternative remedy available which we would reasonably expect him to use, this matter falls outside our jurisdiction and will not be investigated.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman