Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council following the breach of a highway permit by a third-party company. We have not seen enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation. Also, the injustice claimed by the complainant results from the actions of a third party, not the Council.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to protect her from unsafe and obstructive street works. She says that she was unable to access her home for three days when she returned home following a stay in hospital.
2. Mrs X wants:
• an apology;
• the Council to review its permit and inspection procedures; and
• compensation or a goodwill payment.

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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council confirms it granted a permit for BT to carry out works which the application stated would take place only on the carriageway outside Mrs X’s home.
7. It says when Mrs X told officers she could not access her home because the pavement across her driveway had been dug up, it asked an officer to carry out an inspection. Unfortunately, the officer was taken ill. The work was reassigned, but when the inspection took place, the work was completed.
8. The Council says it reviewed the application and issued a Fixed Penalty Notice to BT for breaching the terms of the permit. It has also confirmed it will monitor all BT highway work going forward to ensure they are adhering to the conditions of the permits issued. It also apologised for the failure of the inspection to take place before the work was completed and has explained the unforeseen circumstances that caused this.
9. I understand Mrs X was inconvenienced because she says she could not access her home. However, this was due to the actions of BT, who dug up the pavement outside her home in breach of the conditions of the permit to work on the carriageway which was granted by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. When made aware of the actions of BT, it took appropriate action, including:
• issuing a Fixed Penalty Notice to BT; and
• arranging to monitor future BT works on the highway.

The Council also apologised for the delay in inspecting the site and explained why this happened.

11. The injustice to Mrs X results from the actions of BT, not the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman