Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the upkeep of footpaths. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council has failed to clean and maintain footpaths close to his home and that weeds and debris have blocked the entrance to his home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council about the maintenance of pavements on two roads close to his home.
7. The Council inspected the site and made repairs to the flags and bitmac on one road. The Council said inspectors did not identify any actionable defects on the other road. It explained how it routinely surveyed highways and how different roads are prioritised.
8. The Council’s highways safety inspector did note an issue with weeds and cleansing of the footpath outside a number of houses. These issues had been reported and weeds had been sprayed before Mr X’s Stage two complaint was received by the Council.
9. Mr X said the Council should have a set date schedule for maintaining public surroundings. The Council says street cleaning and weeding is completed on a regular schedule. Residents can also raise ad hoc reports if they notice issues.
10. The Council has looked into Mr X’s concerns. It repaired the footpath and treated weeds. It also explained why further work was not needed. I consider it unlikely we would find fault.
11. Mr X also complained the Council had not replied to his complaints in line with its policies. The Council apologised for the delays. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about. We will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as complaint handling.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman