Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the condition of a pavement. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about a pathway near his home. He says it’s a trip hazard and it is difficult to push his wife in the wheelchair. He wants the Council to repair the path and remove the tree roots that cause the pavement to lift.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))
3. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X told the Council about problems on a pathway near his home. He said tree roots were causing it to lift which caused a safety hazard to pedestrians. Mr X has referred to the Equality Act and the Council’s obligations to ensure public spaces are accessible and says the condition of the path is unacceptable.
7. The Council considered Mr X’s comments and the photograph he sent. It decided the pathway did not meet the criteria to be a high priority for maintenance work. It told Mr X it would be repaired in line with its planned maintenance programme.
8. It told Mr X if the condition of the path gets worse, it is open to him to report it to the Council and it will reassess the priority level.
9. I understand Mr X disagrees with the decision not to take immediate action to repair the path and he has difficulty pushing his wife in her wheelchair. However, I am satisfied the Council properly considered Mr X’s concerns about the condition of the footpath and it was entitled to use its professional judgment to decide the priority that should be given for repairs. We will not investigate this complaint as we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s approach.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault with the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman