Summary: The Ombudsman does not find fault with the way the Council responded to concerns Mr C raised about a pool at a country park.

The complaint

1. Mr C complains about the way the Council responded to his concerns about a pool area at a country park in its area. Mr C says the Council failed to maintain the pool, and as a result the path can no longer be enjoyed by park users.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I investigated the complaint as detailed above.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. During my investigation I:
• considered the information provided by Mr C;
• made enquiries with the Council and considered its response; and
• reviewed relevant guidance and policy.
6. Mr C and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and I carefully considered the comments received.

Back to top

What I found

7. The complaint is about a pool, which is part of a country park owned, operated and managed by the Council.
8. The pool has suffered from flood damage since 2016. This has caused damage to trees, footpaths and a footbridge. The Council has carried out various works and repairs between 2017 and 2019.
9. In 2017 the Council commissioned a feasibility assessment to consider the following options:
• carry out repairs and mitigation measures to ensure the pool remains a body of water separate to the river; or
• allow ‘nature to take its course’ and the pool to become part of the river.

What happened

10. Between 2018 and 2019 Mr C sent numerous emails to the Council raising his concerns about the pool path and other issues at the park. Mr C says the Council should carry out the necessary repairs needed to enable the pool path to stay open.
11. The Council conducted a site visit in November 2018.
12. In December 2018 the Council decided it would not continue to carry out repairs at the pool and would allow ‘nature to take its course’

‘Following an options appraisal and cost evaluation the future of the pool is to allow ‘nature to take its course’ with the pool becoming part of the river. This is the most practical and affordable solution since the area is within the floodplain. Additionally, there are ecological and flood management benefits with this option’.

13. Mr C emailed the Council about several other issues at the park and the Council responded at stage one of its complaint process. This response addressed the other issues, which do not form part of my investigation. In relation to the pool the Council explained the reasons for the issues with the footpaths and fallen trees.
14. Mr C remained unhappy with the Council’s response. He did not accept the Councils explanation about the undercutting at the pool and asked for his complaint to be considered at stage two.
15. In its stage two response the Council said:

‘Following advice from an ecologist, the Council intends to wait for the river level to recede before attempts are made to take the living tree down as low as possible and lay it against the banking’

and

‘It is now considered economically unviable to invest in further improvements to the path as it is situated in a flood risk area. Basically, the paths are being eroded by undercutting’.

16. Mr C was not satisfied with the Council’s stage two response about the pool and complained to the Ombudsman in September 2019.
17. In response to my enquires the Council said:

There is no legal requirement for the Council to maintain to a standard any of its country parks. However, the Council does discharge its duties with respect to its health and safety obligations and its duty of care to visitors.

The Council has also invested resources at the pool. However, given the natural topography of the land, which is prone to flooding, the Council envisages that it will ‘lose’ the pool and it would not be justified committing extra resources to maintain it.

My findings

18. Council funding of leisure and culture is often discretionary. There is likely to be a high involvement of officers’ professional judgement in councils’ discretionary funding decisions.
19. My investigation focussed on consideration of the council’s decision-making process.
20. I found the Council considered the available options when making a decision about the future of the pool and the footpath. It listened and responded to all Mr C’s concerns.
21. In coming to a decision, it sought views and advice from a variety of sources and has documented its consideration and decision making throughout the process. I have been able to review all the information and reports in coming to my decision.
22. I do not find fault in the way the Council considered its decision about the pool. It is not for me to question the Council’s decision where there is no fault in the way it is made

Back to top

Final decision

23. I do not find fault with the way the Council responded to Mr C’s concerns about a pool at one of its country parks.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

24. I did not investigate issues Mr C raised with other parts of country park. The level of personal injustice was such that this did not warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman