Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because there is not enough significant injustice to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr Y has complained about the Council’s failure to cut back overgrowth of a hedge along a public footpath. He complained the Council failed to respond to his complaint in a timely manner and then cut back the vegetation, despite responding that inspections concluded this was unnecessary.
2. Mr Y says this has caused him upset, frustration and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. 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

5. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In his correspondence with us, Mr Y has confirmed that the hedge along the footpath which he had complained about has been cut. While Mr Y is frustrated the hedge was cut, despite the Council’s complaint response suggesting this was not necessary, his aim in contacting the Council has been met. His injustice is therefore limited.
7. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered a serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss of injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
8. Mr Y may feel frustrated by his experience, but this would not be a serious loss or harm, sufficient to warrant an investigation by our service. Consequently we will not investigate.
9. As we are not investigating the substantive matter regarding the hedge, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council dealt with Mr Y’s complaint as referred to in paragraph four. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough significant injustice to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman