Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his request to ‘stop up’ an area of highway land. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or to show its actions caused Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of his request to ‘stop up’ an area of highway land adjacent to his house. He says the Council delayed in processing his application, failed to consider all available options when making a decision, did not properly answer his questions and refused to consider compromises to allow him to proceed with his proposal.

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 effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, even though a complainant may disagree with it.
5. I appreciate Mr X believes the Council should have agreed to stop the land up and I understand the reasons he applied to the Council to do so. But the Council is under no obligation to agree to his request and was entitled to refuse it on any grounds it considered appropriate. The Council’s decision does not change anything for Mr X, who has lived at the property for many years and is in the same position now as he has always been, and the Council has suggested possible ways to tackle some of the issues which led to Mr X’s request.
6. While Mr X is unhappy with the length of time the Council took to deal with his application I cannot say any delay caused Mr X significant injustice. This is because it has ultimately refused the application and we could not say that had it dealt with it more quickly, it would have reached a different decision.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or to show any fault caused Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman