Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance and repair because the court is better placed to consider the complaint, and it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to use her right to go to court about the matter.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complained the Council has wrongly charged her for damage to the pavement outside her property which she says she did not cause. She is also unhappy with how the Council responded to her complaint about the charge.
2. Miss Y says the issue has caused upset and concern.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
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 there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information Miss Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council sent Miss Y an invoice for the cost of repairs to the footpath outside her property. The Council said that during works on Miss Y’s property, which she says were internal only, the pavement became damaged. Miss Y disputes this and her liability for the costs and feels there is insufficient evidence of damage being caused by her for the Council to use its powers to charge her for the works.
8. Under s133 Highways Act 1980, Council can recover costs of repairs to the highway from those who cause damage to it. Where a person disputes their liability for the costs, it is for that person to dispute this through the courts when they receive an invoice for the costs. This includes where there is a dispute about whether there is sufficient evidence or not to justify the charge. We cannot decide liability in such situations, where the courts can.
9. As the courts can decide liability where we cannot and there is a right to dispute such charges in court, it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to use this right and approach the court. This is particularly as the court is better placed to consider the complaint as it can decide whether Miss Y owes the amount or not, where we cannot decide this. We will therefore not investigate this complaint.
10. As we are not investigating the substantive issue, it is not a good use of public funds to investigate how the Council responded to Miss Y’s complaint. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because the court is better placed to consider the complaint, and it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to use her right to go to court about the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman