Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a compensation claim. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant further investigation and it was reasonable to expect Mr X to pursue the matter through the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to properly deal with his compensation claim. He says this caused him to lose the opportunity to pursue the 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)
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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In November 2022, Mr X says he tripped and suffered injuries because the Council had failed to keep a public footpath safe. On 30 October 2025, he submitted a claim to the Council for compensation for his injuries. He says the Council delayed dealing with his compensation claim and did not warn him about the time limitation period.
8. In February 2026, the Council’s insurers said it could not consider the claim because it received the claim more than three years after the accident and it was time-barred.
9. We cannot determine negligence or personal injury claims. These are matters for the courts. If Mr X believes the Council is liable for the injuries he suffered when he fell, it would have been reasonable for him to pursue the matter at court.
10. I appreciate Mr X is frustrated that the Council did not consider his compensation claim before the limitation period expired. However, he submitted his claim almost three years after the accident. Determining liability is a complex matter and it was not reasonable to expect the Council to consider and respond to a personal injury claim within a month.
11. Mr X could also have issued court proceedings while the Council considered his claim. Therefore, we cannot say any delay in the Council’s consideration of the claim caused the injustice. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant further investigation and it was reasonable to expect Mr X to pursue the matter through the courts

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman