Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to notify his mother about installation of a fibre cabinet outside her house and then failure to require repositioning of the cabinet. We will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained on behalf of his mother, Mrs Y, about the Council’s failure to notify his mother about installation of a fibre cabinet outside her house and then failure to require repositioning of the cabinet. He said the cabinet made maintenance of the boundary wall difficult, impeded access to the driveway and obstructed their building plans.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read Mrs Y’s complaint to us and Mr X’s complaint correspondence provided by the Council.
4. I gave Mr X and Mrs Y an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered Mr X’s comments before making this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. A telecommunications firm installed a fibre cabinet on the pavement next to
   Mrs Y’s boundary wall. Mrs Y received no advance notification of the work. Mrs Y was unhappy about the cabinet’s position because:
• it was too close to the wall to allow for maintaining the wall behind it;
• she considered it impeded access to her driveway; and
• its position obstructed her building plans for the side of her property.
6. Mr X understood from the firm that the Council had given permission for the cabinet to be installed in that position. Mr X then complained to the Council about giving permission for the cabinet to be there. He also considered the Council should have notified Mrs Y of work which would affect her property.
7. Through its complaints procedure the Council explained the firm had power to install and maintain its plant and equipment within the highway. It said the firm did not need permission from the Council to do this and the Council had given no specific permission. It said the Council had no highway objections to the cabinet being in this position and disagreed that it impeded use of Mrs Y’s driveway. The Council confirmed it had no grounds to ask the firm to move the cabinet.
8. We have no remit to investigate the actions of the telecommunications firm. The firm is a statutory undertaker which has a right to install and maintain its apparatus on the highway. The Council had no remit to notify Mrs Y of the work the firm proposed to carry out.
9. The Council is the highways authority and has no highways objections to the fibre cabinet being in this position. So, although Mrs Y is unhappy with the cabinet’s position, it is unlikely we would find fault with the Council’s decision not to ask for the cabinet to be moved.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman