Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council deciding not to issue a section 215 notice in relation to the condition of a property next to the complainant’s home. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner about events prior to 2025 and, in any case, there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the use of the powers available to it.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council should have issued a section 215 notice to address an untidy and poorly maintained property next to her home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), section 34(B))

4. With regard to the first bullet point above, we can consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. And we cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council, which included the Council’s complaint responses.
7. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. I appreciate Miss X is very unhappy about the condition of the neighbouring property, and feels the Council should have done more to address it.
9. But the 12-month time restriction detailed in paragraph 5 above appears to apply to any parts of the complaint about what the Council did or did not do in 2023/24, as Miss X did not contact the Ombudsman until March 2026. Whilst I note Miss X says she has been unwell, I am also conscious she continued to raise her concerns with the Council during the intervening period. On balance, I am not persuaded there are sufficient grounds to exercise discretion to consider these late parts of the complaint now.
10. And even if this time restriction did not apply, it is important to note the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at decisions to decide if they are wrong, or replace Council decisions with our own. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
11. Here, officers have visited the site on several occasions, sought advice from other departments and a driveway contractor, and considered its enforcement policy. It has explained to Miss X why action has and has not been taken under the various powers/tools available. The Council was entitled to reach these professional judgements, even if Miss X disagrees with them. I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reached these decisions, so we will not start an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect her to have contacted us sooner about events prior to 2025 and, in any case, there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the use of the powers available to it.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman