Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of concerns about roadworks. This is because there is not enough evidence the Council is at fault to justify an investigation. We will not investigate part of this complaint about alleged damage to the complainant’s property. It is reasonable for the complainant to pursue this through the court.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, says roadworks blocked access to her home and contractors caused damage to her property. She says the works caused her an inconvenience and complains the Council did not inform her of the works.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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)
4. 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 or continue 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X says roadworks outside her property were carried out for a five-day period in November 2025. She says the works blocked access to her home and her property was damaged.
8. The Council says it received reports from Miss X after the works were completed. During works the Council carried out a routine inspection and found them to be compliant with regulations as set out in the Council’s permit for roadworks.
9. The Council gave Miss X the incorrect name of the company responsible for the works. The Council apologised for its mistake and gave Miss X the name of the company responsible. The Council told Miss X the utility company undertaking the works is responsible for keeping residents informed. The Council also says the utility company is responsible for any damage caused to Miss X’s property. The Ombudsman is unlikely to find enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions and we therefore cannot justify an investigation.
10. We will not investigate part of this complaint about alleged damage to Miss X’s property. It is reasonable for her to pursue this through the court.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence the Council is at fault. We will not investigate the alleged damage to Miss X’s property as it is reasonable for her to pursue this through the court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman