Summary: The complainant (Mr X) complained about the Council’s failure to act to prevent using the public road and the pavement for business activity. He also said the Council delayed its stage two response to his complaint. We did not find fault in the way the Council approached its duties under the Highways Act 1980 and in the way it handled Mr X’s complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mr X) says the Council failed to act to prevent using the public road and the pavement for business activity. He says he received no communication from the Council’s highways enforcement team. Mr X also says the Council delayed considering his complaint at stage two.

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. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
    

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have only investigated how the Council dealt with the obstructions of the road reported by Mr X. In his previous complaint reference number 21 002 587 Mr X complained about the environmental health issues, potential anti-social behaviour and planning enforcement.
7. I have not investigated anything that happened before December 2022. As explained in paragraph three we normally look at the events which happened within a year from when the complainant came to us.
8. I have not investigated anything that happened after February 2024, when the Council sent Mr X its stage two response to his complaint. As explained in paragraph five of this decision any reports and actions after this time would need to be raised with the Council first.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered the information Mr X provided.
10. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
11. I reviewed the Council’s Highways Asset Management Team “Enforcement Operations Guide” last updated in April 2024.
12. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

Highways Act 1980

13. It is the duty of the highways authority to assert and protect the rights of the public to the use and enjoyment of any highways for which they are the highways authority, including any roadside waste which forms part of it. (Highways Act 1980 Section 130 (1))

The Council’s highways enforcement team approach

14. Each enforcement report is dealt with based on its own merits as some cases are more serious than others and some may have aggravating circumstances.
15. There is a cross-over of enforcement roles between 3-4 teams with the enforcement protocol in place to ensure any activity is not duplicated.

The Council’s corporate complaints

16. The Council will aim to provide a full response to a complaint in less than 20 working days.
17. If the complainants are still not satisfied, they can ask for the complaint to be considered at stage two. At this stage a Chief Executive will review the complaint. Following this review or if the Council fails to provide a full response to the written complaint within 12 weeks, the complaint can be escalated to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

What happened

Complaint 21 002 587

18. In Mr X’s previous complaint we found the Council had taken too long to properly investigate Mr X’s reports of noise nuisance, fly-tipping and planning breaches. We also found it had not always properly engaged with Mr X about the evidence of fly-tipping.

Highways enforcement

19. In July 2023 Mr X told the planning compliance officer (Council Officer 1) of some activity in the area nearby his property, such as power washing cars, leaving parked cars and vans on both sides of the road and some on the pavement. Some of the vehicles did not have number plates.
20. Council Officer 1 told Mr X leaving cars parked on the road might constitute breach of planning control only if it is linked to the use of the land under the railway bridge. Mr X stated some of the reported problems related to the area under the bridge but for the rest he asked Council Officer 1 to pass his concerns to a right person.
21. Council Officer 1 told the planning enforcement service of Mr X’s report. A few days later Mr X told Council Officer 1 of the continued practice to leave parked vehicles along the street but also some of them blocking the pavement. He suggested using the highways for business was relevant to the planning department whereas obstruction of the pavement was within the traffic department area.
22. After some further reports from Mr X, in mid-August 2023 another planning compliance officer (Council Officer 2) told Mr X she visited the site he was complaining about a week before. She did not see any car parts or other fly-tipping on the street. There were two cars without number plates and several other cars parked along the street. The officer clarified her previous advice that Mr X should contact the waste enforcement team for waste or fly-tipping and highways enforcement team for works and activities taking place on the highways.
23. The highways officer (Council Officer 3) responded to Mr X’s concerns explaining the issues Mr X had raised were not highways related. He also stated that highways enforcement officers had been monitoring the location for a week and would take action for any unauthorised highways obstructions if they were found on the public highway or where mechanics were working on vehicles on the highway. Council Officer 3 clarified his team would not deal with anything relating to planning, waste, noise or vehicles parked on the highways as these were the areas relevant to other teams. In his response to my draft decision Mr X told me he had not received this correspondence.
24. For some time the highways enforcement officers were visiting the site up to three times a day and issued written warnings where relevant. Because often they did not find any activities relevant to their department, in November 2023 they reduced the frequency of their visits. They would report to other teams anything that might need different intervention.
25. Following Mr X’s complaint, in February 2024 the highways enforcement officers increased the frequency of their visits. Most of their observations where non-highways related and the officers referred them to other teams.

Complaint

26. Mr X complained about the Council at the end of September 2023.
27. In its stage one response provided in the second week of November the Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint. It included information on the activities undertaken by various teams following reports received from Mr X. In relation to the highways enforcement duties the Council said it had not enough evidence to confirm that works were taking place on the public highway. The Council was aware there had been some vehicle parts left on the pavement but these had eventually been removed. The Council also provided some details of the parking issues found in the area but did not find any breaches of planning control.
28. In mid-November Mr X asked for his complaint to be escalated to stage two. He said, in August 2023 the planning officer had told him to report to the highways enforcement email address any works taking place on the highway or any further dumping of waste. On the same day Mr X sent photos of some cars without number plates parked on both sides of the road and the pavement as well as some photos of the car parts left on the pavement. A few days later the planning officer corrected her advice and provided a different email address for reporting waste and fly-tipping. She said the highways enforcement team’s address should be used only for any works and activities taking place on the highways.
29. In the third week of December the Council confirmed it would carry out stage two of the complaint procedure. After several emails from Mr X in January 2024, the Council provided its final response to Mr X’s complaint in the first week of February 2024.

Analysis

30. The review of Mr X’s complaint shows how frustrating the issues he reported to the Council from his neighbourhood have been for him. I did not, however, find the Council failed in the way it approached its highways enforcement duties.
31. After Mr X contacted the Council’s highways enforcement team, its officers carried out some site visits. The Council told us most of the issues found related to the areas relevant to other teams and they were referred to them. The Council said the officers had issued some written warnings where relevant.
32. As pointed out in paragraph three of this decision we cannot decide for the Council what makes up highways obstruction and how it should respond to the reported activity. Besides the Council can split its functions between its various teams provided it is explained to the residents and does not stop the Council in carrying out its duties. Council Officer 3 told Mr X what he should report to the highways enforcement team. Although Mr X did not receive this communication the evidence shows it was sent to the correct email address. The Council relied on this correspondence in which it had provided clarification on the areas of work for various teams. I cannot hold the Council responsible for Mr X not receiving this email.
33. The highways enforcement team responded to Mr X’s reports, carried out site visits and took actions it considered satisfactory which is what we would expect. I found no fault in the way the Council’s highways enforcement team dealt with Mr X’s reports.
34. It is disappointing the Council has not yet installed closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, despite telling us of its plan to do so during our previous investigation in 2022/2023. In its response to my enquiries the Council stated its environmental team has now got the equipment and would install it at various locations, including the street which Mr X’s reports referred to.

Complaint handling

35. The Council responded to Mr X’s stage one complaint after 30 working days and to his stage two complaint after 12 weeks.
36. There was some delay in responding to Mr X’s stage one complaint but not significant enough to be considered fault. Although the Council took the maximum amount of time allowed for the stage two investigation, in view of the complexity of the matters and the involvement of various teams, 12 weeks for carrying out this stage does not seem excessive.
37. I found no fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I do not to uphold this complaint. For the reasons explained in the Analysis section I found no fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s reports of highway obstructions and handled his complaint.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman