Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to make changes to the layout of the area near the complainant’s home. This is because we have no power to investigate part of the complaint and there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council will not stop children playing football on a grassed area near his home and will not stop bikes riding across the grass. He also complains the Council will not widen the road near his home. Mr X wants the Council to reduce the area of grass and widen the road.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of Housing Associations or other landlords. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence, photographs of the site, and email exchanges between Mr X and the Council. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complains of a range of issues. These include children playing football on an area of grass and bikes riding over the grass. He says his home has been damaged by the football, children could run into the road, and vehicles driving on the grass cause damage.
6. Mr X also says the road is too narrow. He says cars have been damaged due to the lack of space, his car has been obstructed, and the refuse truck can find it hard to get around due to the lack of width.
7. The Council’s highway team considered the road and decided no action is needed. It explained that widening the road would be very expensive, not least because the grassed area would need to be reconstructed. The Council said the road has low traffic flow and is a low priority area. The Council also said that issues such as anti-social behaviour, and parking obstructions, are matters for the police.
8. The area of grass is managed by the landlord, not the Council. This means any decisions about the grass are made by the landlord. We can only investigate the actions of councils or bodies acting on behalf of a council. This means we have no power to investigate this part of the complaint. Further, even if the Council was Mr X’s landlord, the law says we cannot investigate a council when it is acting as a landlord. So, we could not investigate this part of the complaint regardless of who the landlord is. In addition, it would be for the landlord or the police to deal with the anti-social behaviour or the bike riding.
9. I will not investigate the complaint about the other issues because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The highways team considered Mr X’s request to widen the road and explained why it would not agree. Councils are not required to implement every request made by a resident and, providing the request has been considered and reasons given, then there is no suggestion of fault and no reason for us to investigate. I have considered photographs of the site and the reasons provided by the Council are consistent with the area.
10. We are not an appeal body and we cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not start an investigation because we have no power to investigate part of the complaint and there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman