Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s actions regarding a local allotment, parking on his street, and the reply to his complaint. There is insufficient evidence of Council fault or personal injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has allowed the erection of a shed in the community allotment which is part of the local park. He says the shed is an eyesore. He says there is a water butt which does not need to be there. Grass cutting can cause a nuisance when it is mid evening and can last over an hour. Mr X says covid-19 rules have been broken in the park.
2. Mr X complains people using the allotment and/or local club leave their vehicles on his street causing parking difficulties for residents. He says members have been abusive and damaged cars on his street. He says the Council put up parking signs but they have not improved the situation.
3. Mr X complains the Council has failed to take his complaints seriously. He says he suffers sleep deprivation and mental problems. He says the Council should have more regard for the well being of residents.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered Mr X’s information, comments, and reply to my draft decision statement. The information held includes the Council’s reply to Mr X’s complaint. I have considered internet photographs of the area.

Back to top

My assessment

6. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of Council fault or significant injustice:
1. The Council visited the parties and assessed the position. It has agreed the relocation of the shed, a reduction in its size and that it will be screened by shrubs. The Council says it is reasonable the allotment has a shed and it is an acceptable distance from Mr X’s property. The Council says it has reminded volunteers who cut the grass to be considerate. It says there is no noise nuisance and the latest example of cutting grass was at 19:45. Mr X tells me the relocation of the shed has made matters worse, he says grass cutting has been as late as 8:55. He believes the Council is allowing its volunteers and members of a local church to do what they want. Mr X has not supplied evidence to show he has a significant problem.
2. The Council says it previously dealt with street concerns by putting up parking signs and sending members of the club reminders about parking. It says the parking enforcement team has not had further complaints. It has advised Mr X to report to the police any vehicle damage.
7. Investigation by the Ombudsman is not likely to add to what the Council has said or change the position. The Council has replied appropriately to Mr X’s complaint and dealt with his points.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s actions regarding a local allotment, parking on his street, and the reply to his complaint. There is insufficient evidence of Council fault or personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman