Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council has failed to repair potholes properly and wastes taxpayers’ money. The Council has not caused Mrs X a personal injustice. We cannot investigate tax expenditure because it affects ‘all or most’ people in the area.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council’s repairs to potholes on her street are a shoddy job and a waste of taxpayers’ money. She says it would be more cost effective in the long run if the Council did proper repairs.

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:

• 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, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

3. We cannot investigate something that affects all or most of the people in a council’s area. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered Mrs X’s information, comments, and reply to my draft decision statement. I have considered Mrs X’s photographs and the Council’s reply to the complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mrs X says the Council repaired some potholes a couple of days after she reported them. Her photographs show some repairs and some damage to the highway which was not repaired. Mrs X says the repairs bear no resemblance to a Council video of how a pothole should be repaired.
6. The Council says a highways inspector visited and found 9 potholes which he graded for repair. An officer has visited following the work and says the repair meets the inspector’s specification and that the work is not sub-standard. The Council’s complaint reply also refers to the limits on its highways budget.

Analysis

7. I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons.
8. The Ombudsman investigates fault causing injustice. I do not consider the Council has caused injustice to Mrs X in how it has repaired the potholes or replied to her complaint.
9. The Ombudsman cannot investigate a complaint about wasting taxpayers’ money. That is outside our jurisdiction because it affects all or most people in the Council’s area (see paragraph 3 above).

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council has failed to repair potholes properly and wastes taxpayers’ money. The Council has not caused Mrs X a personal injustice. We cannot investigate tax expenditure because it affects ‘all or most’ people in the area.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman