Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged when Council workers were maintaining the highway. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim at court.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains his car was damaged by a stone when Council workers were using grass strimmers by the highway. Mr B says this incident was the result of the Council’s failure to properly assess and manage foreseeable risk, but the Council has wrongly refused his claim for compensation. Mr B also complains the Council took too long handling his claim and has not provided meaningful responses to the specific points he has raised.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr B.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. We do not normally investigate complaints about damage to property. This is because in effect such complaints are that an organisation has been negligent. Our role is to consider complaints of administrative fault. Negligence claims are best decided by an organisation’s insurers, and if needed, the courts.
7. Mr B has received the Council’s decision on his compensation claim. Mr B may now pursue his claim by taking the Council to court.
8. Only a court can decide if the Council was negligent, and if so, enforce an award of damages. We cannot recommend actions or payments that ‘punish’ an organisation.
9. I find it is reasonable for Mr B to take the Council to court and the initial fee for making a claim is relatively modest. Mr B may also seek legal advice about taking the Council to court if needed.
10. So, we will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the damage to his vehicle.
11. We would not normally start an investigation solely into an organisation’s handling of a claim or complaint if, as with this complaint, we are not investigating the substantive matter.
12. I find an investigation solely into the Council’s handling of Mr B’s claim is not justified. Importantly, Mr B has received the Council’s decision on his claim and the Council has reviewed its decision in response to his representations. I find Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his claim is largely a challenge to the strength of the Council’s defence, which he can argue at court.
13. An investigation solely into the Council’s administrative handling of Mr B’s claim is unlikely to be a good use of our limited resources or achieve a meaningful outcome for Mr B.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to take the Council to court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman