Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s response to a safety risk at a Council car park which he has reported. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains he fell over a boulder by a payment machine in a Council car park and suffered injuries as a result. Mr B says this boulder is a risk to the public but the Council has not taken the matter seriously or promptly removed the boulder.

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 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr B.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council has explained the reason for the boulders and says this was the first reported incident since boulders were installed in this location over 18 months earlier. The Council says officers have visited the site to investigate this issue and have liaised with the Council’s Health and Safety Officer. The Council has explained the steps it is taking in response to Mr B’s concerns.
7. The information indicates the Council has taken Mr B’s concerns seriously. Mr B is not satisfied with the action taken by the Council so far. But, it is for the Council to decide what action, if any, to take in response to Mr B’s concerns. This was a professional judgement for relevant officers to make. Unless there is evidence of fault in the decision-making process, we cannot question the professional judgement of the officers involved.
8. So, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation into the Council’s handling of Mr B’s concerns.
9. If Mr B seeks compensation for the injuries he suffered he would need to put in a compensation claim to the Council’s insurers, and if needed, take the Council to court. Only the courts can decide personal injury claims and order a party to pay damages.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman