Summary: Mr C complained about the Council removing supports from his fence in 2014, which he said caused damage to the fence. We decided we could not investigate the complaint because the events happened more than 12 months ago, Mr C could have complained about them earlier and it was reasonable for him to have challenged the Council’s decision through the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr C complained that the Council removed fence supports from his fence causing it to blow down in bad weather. This caused Mr C frustration and inconvenience.

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 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)
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 have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant and the Council. Mr C and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr C had installed fence supports between his fence and some trees across a footpath. Mr C says they were about seven feet above the ground. In 2014 the Council removed the supports because it considered they were a hazard to users of the footpath.
7. Mr C says that after the supports had been removed, his fence blew down in bad weather. In 2017 he submitted a claim against the Council for damage to his property. In June 2017 the Council’s insurers visited the site. It concluded one of the supports had been removed because it was rotten and no longer attached to the tree so was not providing any support. It said there was no evidence that the fence had blown down as a result of the support being removed and there was no real evidence of damage to the fence beyond its extremely poor condition. The Council denied liability and closed the case in January 2018.
8. In 2020 Mr C complained to his MP about the fence and his MP raised the matter with the Council. the Council responded in December 2020, explaining what had happened in 2017. Mr C made another complaint in February 2021 about this and other issues. The Council replied in March 2021 and again in May 2021 explaining the action it had taken in 2014 and 2017.
9. Mr C then complained to us.

Analysis

10. The fence supports were removed in 2014. Mr C did not complain to us within 12 months of the removal, and I consider there were no good reasons why he could not have complained to us sooner. So, I shall not pursue an investigation into the complaint as the events are too old to investigate now.
11. I have also noted that Mr C made an insurance claim against the Council in 2017 which the Council refused. If Mr C disagreed with the decision the correct route to challenge it would be in court. The Ombudsman cannot make findings of liability as that is a matter for the courts. In this case I consider it reasonable for Mr C to take court action if he wishes to challenge the Council’s decision on his insurance claim.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I have discontinued the investigation because the complaint is outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman