Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage allegedly caused by a pothole. The matter is best considered by the courts as it is really a negligence claim.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to compensate him for the cost of repairing damage to his vehicle, allegedly due to a pothole. He said there were faults in the Council’s insurers’ claim-handling, and he raised concerns about the small number of upheld pothole claims. He said the cost of repairing the damage to his vehicle was £160. He wants the Council to reimburse him for this and make service improvements.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. We will not normally investigate complaints about damage or personal injury. This is because these matters are really negligence claims, which the courts are best placed to consider.
6. There is not a good reason in this case for us to consider the matter instead. The small claims court is a relatively straightforward process, with a sliding scale of fees relative to the amount sought. The process does not necessitate legal representation. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to assess economic losses or award compensation, and where this is a person’s primary goal we will usually signpost them to the courts.
7. We expect councils to deal effectively with insurance claims. However, we will generally not consider complaints about how claims are handled, as it is not a good use of public funds to do so when we are not considering the substantive matter itself.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is a matter for court, as it is really a negligence claim.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman