Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to undertake actions agreed during its complaints process regarding a development near the complainant’s home. Any injustice caused to the complainant by the alleged faults is not significant enough to justify our continued involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to undertake actions agreed during its complaints process, which related to ensuring an access to a residential development was installed in accordance with the associated planning permission.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, 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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
4. And we cannot investigate complaints made by, or on behalf of public bodies, including parish councils. (Local Government Act 1974, section 27(1)(a), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X.
• information about the planning application for the development, on the Council’s planning portal.
• on-line ‘streetview’ images of the access.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. I appreciate Mr X’s expectations were raised when the Council said it would remind the owners the access was only for pedestrian use, and that it would install bollards to prevent vehicular use. I also acknowledge Mr X would have spent some time and effort on pursuing the matter.
7. However, with reference to paragraphs 2 and 3 above, I am not persuaded the extent of any injustice to Mr X is so significant as to justify the Ombudsman starting an investigation. In reaching this view, I am mindful the highways authority has recently confirmed the access is suitable for use by vehicles.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any injustice caused to him by the alleged faults is not significant enough to justify our continued involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman