Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to charge a fee to use tennis courts. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. Also, the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Ms B, complains the Council has decided to charge £5 per hour to use tennis courts which were previously free to use. Ms B says her family plays tennis daily and the fee is preventing her family and others play tennis. Ms B says the courts are now often empty and she would like the Council to make the courts free to use or charge an affordable fee.

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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms B.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council says:
• it decided that it was no longer able to continue to offer park tennis courts for free.
• the decision to charge a fee is in line with what other local authorities are doing.
• the income generated will be used to update, clean and maintain the tennis courts.
• it has noticed that since the introduction of the gate access system, anti-social behaviour and improper use of the tennis courts has reduced significantly.
6. The Council has explained its reasons for introducing the fee and says the income will be used to maintain the courts. Ms B disagrees with this decision, but it is for the Council to decide how to manage use of the tennis courts. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. In addition, the injustice Ms B says she has suffered is not significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. Also, the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman