Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has failed to take responsibility for the maintenance of a path outside his home.
2. Mr Y says the path’s condition has deteriorated, to the extent that Mr Y says it has become dangerous, causing Mr Y’s wife to struggle to leave her home.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr Y complained to the Council about the lack of the maintenance of the path next to his home in 2024. The Council contacted other bodies to try to identify the landowner for the path, and therefore who was responsible for any maintenance. It said in its final response that it is unable to identify the landowner following its enquiries. It also confirmed that the land had not been adopted and therefore it had no duty to maintain the path. Mr Y then approached us.
6. The Council has a duty to properly maintain adopted streets and highways, including footpaths. In this case, Mr Y has said the Council will not provide him with evidence that the path is unadopted and therefore he does not accept the Council’s response that it will not maintain or repair the path. However, this would require the Council to show an absence of evidence, which it cannot do.
7. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, and the Council’s explanation that it has not adopted the footpath, having checked this with its own records team, we would not be able to find fault in this case.
8. This is because without evidence of the adoption of the footpath, there is no evidence that the Council owes a duty to maintain the footpath. Where there is no duty on the Council to carry out the maintenance work, there is not enough evidence of fault in failing to meet that duty to justify investigation. Consequently, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman