Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take action over flags suspended from lamp posts by unknown persons in his area. There is insufficient evidence if fault and personal injustice to Mr X which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to prevent flags being attached to lamp post in his area and its refusal to remove them. He says it is affecting social cohesion in his area and he was threatened when he confronted unknown persons erecting the flags.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused personal injustice to the person who complained, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says he has suffered threats and abuse when he confronted unknown persons putting up flags on lamp posts in his area. He complained about the flags to the Council. The Council says it strongly discourages the putting up of flags on public property but it will only remove them where there is evidence of a road safety or community safety concern or the flags represent a proscribed organisation.
6. Many councils have experienced the unauthorised addition of flags in their areas in recent years. They do not have a duty to remove them but may do so if they have a policy for this. Due to the costs involved and the likelihood of re-erection in the same area they have chosen to only remove them where there is a genuine concern to do so.
7. The removal of the flags is a discretionary power available to highway authorities and not a statutory duty. It is for each authority to decide what action to take in these circumstances.
8. Mr X says he has suffered harassment and threats when he has challenged the actions. This claimed injustice is a criminal matter and for the police not the highway authority because public order and threatening behaviour falls within their remit.
9. The Ombudsman is 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, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take action over flags suspended from lamp posts by unknown persons in his area. There is insufficient evidence if fault and personal injustice to Mr X which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman