Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the maintenance of a pavement because this matter would be better dealt with by the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to maintain a pavement, which led to him falling and sustaining injuries and damage to his clothes. Mr X further complained the Council failed to provide evidence to support its claim the pavement was on a private forecourt and was not Council maintained.
2. Mr X wanted the Council to provide evidence that the pavement is not maintained by it, explain why it repaired the pavement if it is not its responsibility, and to provide financial compensation.

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 cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X says he had a fall on a pavement in November 2024 and sustained injuries and damage to his clothing.
8. Mr X raised this to the Council shortly after and the Council denied liability in December 2024, informing Mr X that the pavement was on a private forecourt.
9. Complaints about damage to property and personal injury are really negligence claims, and the Ombudsman does not normally investigate such complaints. Negligence claims are generally best left to the courts to decide. Only a court can decide whether:
• the authority should have dealt with the problem before it caused the complainant harm;
• the complainant should have taken steps to avoid the harm; and
• the Council is liable to pay damages for any loss or injury.
10. It would be reasonable for Mr X to take his claim to court, as this would be a more suitable process and there is not a good reason in this case for the Ombudsman to consider the matter instead. For this reason, we will not investigate this complaint.
11. Mr X’s complaint is also about how the Council considered his claim. We expect councils to respond appropriately to any claims but would not normally investigate a complaint that they had not done so, as the underlying issue is a matter for the courts.
12. In any event, the complaint is also late as Mr X bought his complaint to the Ombudsman in January 2026, which is more than 12 months from the date he became aware of the substantive issue. There is not a good reason for the delay and so we would also not investigate the complaint for this reason.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to take the matter to court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman