Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to private property. This is because the courts are better placed to consider the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council damaged his driveway during works on the footpath.
2. Mr X said he did not give the Council permission to carry out work on his driveway.
3. Mr X wants the Council to rectify the damage.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X said the Council damaged his driveway during works carried out on the pathway outside his property. He said the Council accessed his property without permission.
9. Mr X contacted the council after the works and said his driveway was not in the same condition before the works started. The Council said their contractor attended and it was reported by an occupant of Mr X’s property that the work was satisfactory.
10. In its complaint response, the Council said it attended the property to rectify the area of the driveway impacted. It said it had gained consent for the work. It offered to rectify the disputed damage; it did not get consent from Mr X to do so.
11. The Council also said it found a pre-existing issue on the driveway and told Mr X it would not address this. The Council apologised for delays in responding to Mr X’s correspondence about the matter.
12. We will not investigate this complaint because we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. The Council offered to remedy the work and set out a time scale for completion. It also apologised for communication delays.
13. We do not normally investigate complaints about property damage. This is because, in effect, such complaints are that an organisation has been negligent.
14. Our role is to consider complaints of administrative fault. Negligence claims are best decided by an organisation’s insurers, and if needed, the courts. Only the courts can decide if an organisation was negligent, and if so, make an order for damages.
15. We will not investigate this complaint. Mr X can now pursue the complaint by making a claim to the Council’s insurance, and if he remains dissatisfied, then taking the Council to court.
16. I find it is reasonable for Mr X to do this, either directly or by his home insurer. The initial fee for making a claim is relatively modest and only the courts can determine if the Council is liable for the claimed damage.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the courts are better placed to consider the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman