Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that weedkiller used by the Council has damaged a grass area outside the complainant’s home. We are unlikely to find fault by the Council has caused the complainant injustice that would not warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr B, has complained about damage to the grass verge outside his home caused by the Council using weedkiller on the pavement. He says the verge becomes unsightly and muddy where the grass is dead.

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’.
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault;
• the 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), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered what Mr B said in his complaint which included the Council’s response to his concerns. Mr B commented on a draft before I made this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council uses weedkiller sprayed from a moving vehicle to keep the pavement outside Mr B’s home clear of weeds. On occasion, weedkiller falls on an area of grass between the pavement and Mr B’s garden wall. This area is owned and maintained by the Council although Mr B also carries out some work to it voluntarily.
6. Mr B says when the grass is killed by the weedkiller, the area becomes unsightly and muddy, causing a hazard.
7. The Council has asked its contractor to take more care when spraying, but it cannot guarantee using weedkiller on the pavement will not affect grass areas such as that outside Mr B’s home. The Council also accepts it did not re-seed the area as it had intended. It says it will take action if the grass does not re-seed itself in the spring.

Analysis

8. The Council is responsible for the area of grass and can decide how it is maintained. It has not ignored Mr B’s concerns and has explained why it is not possible to totally prevent some grass being killed. It has also said it will take remedial action if it thinks this is necessary. There is no evidence of fault by the Council in this.
9. Further, even if there had been some fault, I do not consider the impact on Mr B warrants our involvement. I understand he would prefer the grass to be in good condition all the time but he has not been caused a significant injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. This is because, while I recognise the grass area has been affected, I have seen no evidence of fault by the Council causing injustice to Mr B that warrants our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman