Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to remove a lighting column and a tree stump from the footway. There is insufficient evidence of any fault by the Council which has caused injustice to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council refusing to move a lighting column form the footway outside his home. He says it is an obstruction to his driveway. He also complained about a tree stump in the footway which he claims is a hazard and has damaged the surface.

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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained about obstruction in the footway from a lighting column and a trees tump. The Council says the column has been in place for over 10 years and has not been moved any closer to his drive entrance. It is about six feet along the boundary hedge from the driveway crossing and should not present any hazard for a car being driven on the permitted area for crossing the footway.
6. The Council is the highway authority and it can decide what infrastructure is placed within the highway boundaries. The tree stump is from a former mature tree and has again been in situ for many years. It says that stumps are being removed over time but there is no requirement for the Council to do this within a particular timescale.
7. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made. Instead, we focus on the process by which the decision was made, and where we find fault in that process, we then determine whether or not it has caused the complainant a significant injustice.
8. In this case there is no evidence of any fault by the Council or any significant injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to remove a lighting column and a tree stump from the footway. There is insufficient evidence of any fault by the Council which has caused injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman