Surrey County Council (24 004 326)
Category : Transport and highways > Highway repair and maintenance
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 30 Jul 2024
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage caused to Ms X’s vehicle when the Council removed the road surface. The matter is best dealt with as an insurance claim, which should be escalated to the courts should no resolution be achieved.
The complaint
- Ms X complained the Council reopened a road prematurely after removing the road surface, causing damage to several vehicles, including her own. She said the Council failed to deal properly with her claim, asking her to submit evidence repeatedly and relying on her to deal with contractors. She said this has caused her a financial detriment, and she has experienced considerable stress and inconvenience in trying to resolve the matter. She wanted the Council to settle her claim promptly.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- We will normally not investigate complaints about damage to property. This is because such matters are really negligence claims, which the courts are best placed to consider. Only the courts can decide whether the Council is liable for the costs of repairing damage.
- The small claims court process is relatively straightforward and there is a sliding scale of fees relative to the amount being claimed. It is not necessary to have legal representation to use this process. There is not a good reason for us to consider the matter instead.
- While we expect councils to deal with claims promptly, we will not normally investigate a complaint that they have not done so. This is because it is not a good use of public resources to consider how the matter was handled when we will not investigate the substantive matter itself. It is open to the complainant to escalate the matter to the courts even if they have not received a final outcome.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is best considered a negligence claim via the courts.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman