Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a claim for damage to his motor vehicle. This is because Mr X has an alternative legal remedy, to pursue a claim of negligence through the courts. Only the courts can decide whether the Council was negligent, and it is therefore reasonable to expect Mr X to seek a remedy in court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained a pothole caused damage to his motor vehicle. Mr X said the Council had refused his claim to reimburse him for those damages.

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 law 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. Negligence claims and interpreting the law around civil liability are generally best decided by a court where the Council does not accept insurance liability. Only a court can decide whether the problem should have been dealt with by the Council before it caused damage to a person’s property, or if it is liable to pay damages for a person’s loss.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has an alternative legal remedy, through the courts and because only the courts can achieve the outcome he is looking for, it is reasonable to expect him to use this remedy. 

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman