Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council should adopt a green space within the residential development where the complainant lives. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in relation to the green space, and the delay in responding to the associated correspondence/complaint has not caused the complainant a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council should adopt the green spaces in the residential development where he lives, as residents should not be expected to pay associated, uncapped management fees when the wider public also has access to the spaces.

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 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))

3. And it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X, and an update from the Council.
5. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In response to the Ombudsman’s enquiries, the Council has explained it does not automatically adopt open spaces within new housing estates. It says it is commonplace for open spaces to be retained by the developer for the provision of facilities such as play parks, for which a service charge/management fee is levied on householders who have purchased properties that form part of the development. When purchasing property, the solicitor who acted on Mr X’s behalf should have drawn his attention to the service charge provision within the contract of sale and the future liabilities that this would impose upon him. The Council says it is not able to assist Mr X as it has no legal interest in the land he refers to.
7. In light of the above, I find there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, in relation to its responsibilities for the green spaces, to justify the Ombudsman investigating this part of the complaint.
8. And whilst there was delay by the Council in responding to Mr X’s associated enquiries/complaints, any injustice arising from this fault is not significant enough to warrant the Ombudsman pursuing the matter in isolation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in relation to its responsibility for the green spaces, and he has not suffered a significant injustice as a result of the Council’s delay in responding to the associated complaint correspondence.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman