Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s contractor’s works to her parents’ vehicle crossover, and the damage she claims it caused to her car. If council insurers deny liability, it is for the courts to establish any liability in property damage complaints. It is reasonable for Mrs X to pursue the matter in court. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s own complaint process in isolation from the core vehicle damage issue.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains:
1. the Council’s contractors did not properly fix her parents’ vehicle crossover kerb, which caused damage to her car when she drove over it;
2. the Council has failed to properly deal with her complaint.
2. Mrs X wants compensation and an apology for:
• the damage to her car, which she has now sold because of the incident;
• the annoyance, upset and frustration caused by the matter, and by trying to resolve it.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X has the right to make a court claim for the compensation she seeks and we cannot normally investigate when someone can take the matter to court. We can exercise discretion to investigate but there are no good reasons to do so here. This is because we cannot establish liability in complaints involving property damage. Claims for damage to property are a matter for councils’ insurers and, ultimately, for the courts. If the Council’s insurers deny liability for the car damage, it would then be for the courts to determine:
• if the Council’s contractor’s works to the crossover were negligent;
• who is legally liable for the damage caused to Mrs X’s previous car; and
• if damages or other remedies are due to her.

There is a simple, low-cost legal procedure open to anyone to make this kind of claim in court. For these reasons, it is reasonable for Mrs X to take court action to pursue the matter and we will not investigate.

6. Mrs X has sold the damaged car. But if she believes the damage caused her any loss when disposing of the car, she might make this allegation part of any claim she makes to the Council’s insurers, or part of any court action.
7. Mrs X also complains the Council has not dealt with her complaint properly, including not providing her with details of the highway works contractor. We will not investigate council complaints processes in isolation where we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to the complaint. We do not consider it to be a good use of public funds to do so. That limitation applies here, so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• it is reasonable for her to use the legal remedy available to her regarding the impact on her of the damage to her previous car;
• we will not investigate council complaints processes in isolation where we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman