Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Teignbridge District Council (17 016 827)

Category : Planning > Other

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 26 Feb 2018

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s refusal to change the name of a business park where her business has relocated to. The Ombudsman will not investigate her complaint because there is no evidence of fault causing injustice.

The complaint

  1. Ms X complains about the Council’s refusal to change the name of a business park where her business has relocated to.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:
  • it is unlikely we would find fault, or
  • the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
  • the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered ther complaint

  1. I have considered the complainant's comments and the Council's comments and Ms X has had an opportunity to comment on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Ms X’s business is due to locate to a business park in February 2018. She says that, after committing herself to the move, she found that the business park was named after the developer and therefore it would feature as part of the address. She also regards the developer’s name as offensive and any signage could be vandalised.
  2. The Council says that it has powers to deal with street names but not the names of business parks which is at the discretion of the owner.
  3. I am not therefore persuaded that the Council has acted with fault in its refusal to take action. Nor do I consider the injustice to be significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I do not intend to investigate Ms X’s complaint. There is no evidence of fault causing injustice by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page