Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Public Space Protection Order as the information Mr X has provided does not indicate fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has introduced a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) at a beauty spot where Mr X has swum for many years. Mr X’s mental health has been affected by no longer being able to swim at the location. Mr X is unhappy that the Council has, in essence, made it a criminal activity to swim there.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. 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)
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 enabled local authorities to use Public Space Protection Orders (PSPO) to address anti-social behaviour in local areas. The Council has used a PSPO to prevent swimming at a local beauty spot as it says the practice was associated with anti-social behaviour and impacted upon wildlife at the location.
8. Mr X is unhappy that the Council has chosen to do this as he has swum at the location for many years. Mr X has not, however, given an indication of how the Council was at fault in introducing the PSPO. In the absence of fault, we cannot investigate, and we cannot question the merits of the Council’s decision.
9. Additionally, the 2014 Act specifically provided an appeal route to the court, to enabled interested persons to challenge the validity of such orders.
10. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in the complaint Mr X has made.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman