Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision-making relating to a defective structure. Mrs X has an alternative legal remedy through the courts, who can decide any claim for liability. And given only the courts can decide this and we cannot, it would be reasonable to expect Mrs X to use this alternative remedy.

The complaint

1. Mrs X was unhappy the Council delayed taking action in relation to a defective structure. She said the Council had known for several years the structure was defective and if it had acted sooner, it would not have been necessary to close the structure. Mrs X said this resulted in significant economic losses to her because access to her property was then affected.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. Negligence claims and interpreting the law around legal torts are generally best decided by a court where no insurance liability is accepted. Only a court can decide whether the problem should have been dealt with by the Council before it caused economic harm or if the Council is liable to pay damages for economic loss.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because she has an alternative legal remedy through the courts and it would be reasonable to expect her to use it. This is because only a court can decide liability and we cannot.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman