Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about grass verges being destroyed by people parking on them. This is because Mr X is not caused a significant personal injustice from his complaint and the Ombudsman’s involvement is not therefore warranted.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains grass verges in street near to his home are being destroyed by people parking on them. Mr X is dissatisfied with the Council’s response.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 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 this complaint

3. I have considered what Mr X said in his complaint. I have written to Mr X with my draft decision and considered his comments about it.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X complains that grass verges in a street near to his home are constantly being destroyed by people parking on them. Mr X wants the Council to put ground posts in the verges to stop parking and to allow the grass to re-grow.
5. Mr X says the verges are an eyesore and cause mud to be transferred into people’s homes.

Assessment

6. While it is clear Mr X is unhappy about the state of the verges, the impact on him personally, from our perspective, is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

7. My decision is that the Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because the level of injustice caused to Mr X is not sufficient to warrant the Ombudsman’s involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman