Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway adoption and maintenance. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council failed to ensure adoption standards for roads and footpaths within the estate he lives on.
2. Mr Y complained about planning conditions, and the Council’s handling of enforcement and planning breaches.
3. Mr Y also complained about complaint handling and the conduct of a Council officer.
4. Mr Y says the highway is unsafe.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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

6. I considered information provided by Mr Y and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr Y complained to the Council failed to adopt roads and footpaths on a new residential development site.
9. We will not investigate this complaint. In its complaint response the Council explained the process that must be carried out before it can adopt areas of the estate, and why it could not provide a timescale. The Council explained that until formal adoption of these take place, the housing developer remains responsible for maintaining the roads and footpaths. The Council considered Mr Y’s safety concerns and explained why it does not consider there to be a hazard. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant the Ombudsman’s involvement.
10. Whilst the roads and footpaths remain unadopted by the Council, Mr Y should raise any concerns he has with the condition of these to the housing developer responsible for them.
11. Mr Y mentioned planning conditions in his complaint to us but has not raised this with the Council. If Mr Y is unhappy with how the Council dealt with planning breaches, he should make a separate complaint to the Council.
12. Mr Y complained about complaint handling, and the conduct of a Council officer. The Council apologised to Mr Y for this. 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