Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about footpath maintenance because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains the Council has failed to ensure a path in her local area has been cleared of vegetation sufficiently.
2. Miss Y says this makes the footpath inaccessible for pushchairs and wheelchair users including those walking to the local primary school.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss Y complained to the Council about an overgrown hedge and overhanging planting which was blocking the pavement on a road near her home.
7. The Council ensured the hedge and overhanging planting was cut back but Miss Y says the action taken is not sufficient. She says that while the hedge has been cut back, the hedge still narrows the pavement, making it difficult for those with pushchairs or wheelchair users to use the footpath without needing to go into the road. She says the hedge is too large over the frontage of two properties, rather than just one, which the Council has photographed.
8. The Council is the highways authority for the area. It has used its judgement to decide whether the amount of hedge but back is sufficient to clear the obstruction in its professional opinion. While Miss Y may disagree and suggest that the hedge needs to be cut back further so from the second property it does not cover the footpath at all, this is a decision for the Council in its judgement.
9. As the Council has considered the issue, considered the action taken and made a judgement that the work is sufficient, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman