Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged by a large pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains his car was damaged by a large pothole which the Council had failed to repair, and he had to pay £850 for the required repairs. Mr B says the Council and its contractor have wrongly refused to accept responsibility for the damage even after he provided compelling evidence from a freedom of information request to support his claim. Mr B says this matter has been distressing and time consuming, and he has incurred costs pursuing his claim.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The Act 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council as a local highways authority has a statutory duty to maintain adopted streets. The Council is expected to routinely monitor the state of highways and carry out repairs where necessary. But importantly, the level of maintenance, frequency of inspection, and threshold for repair is not set out in law and is open to interpretation.
7. We do not normally investigate complaints about vehicle damage caused by highway disrepair. This is because in effect such complaints are that an organisation has been negligent. Our role is to consider complaints of administrative fault. Negligence claims are best decided by an organisation’s insurers, and if needed, the courts.
8. Mr B has received the Council’s decision on his compensation claim. Mr B may pursue his claim by taking the Council to court.
9. Deciding whether an organisation has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way at evidence as only the court can to make its findings. Also, unlike the courts, we have no powers to enforce an award of damages.
10. So, I would usually expect someone in Mr B’s position to seek a remedy in the courts. I find it is reasonable for Mr B to do this and the initial fee for making a claim is relatively modest.
11. So, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to take the Council to court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman