Nottinghamshire County Council (20 003 546)

Category : Transport and highways > Rights of way

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 13 Nov 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s delay in referring a map modification order to the Planning Inspectorate. The Ombudsman has discontinued our investigation. This is because Mr X has asked the Ombudsman to withdraw his complaint as the Council has now referred the matter to the Planning Inspectorate.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains about the Council’s delay in referring a map modification order to the Planning Inspectorate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
  2. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered the information provided by Mr X.
  2. I considered the information provided by the Council.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

  1. A member of the public can ask for a Modification Order to the Definitive Map if they believe, and has supporting evidence, that a footpath or other right of way is shown on the wrong place on the map. This process can also be used to claim that an existing path should be on the map if it is not.
  2. The Council must publicise the order and if there are not objections from the public, it is confirmed, and the right of way is added. If it is opposed, the Council must submit the proposed order to the Planning Inspectorate for a decision. There is no time scale set out in law for when a Council must refer the case to the Planning Inspectorate by.
  3. In 2004, Mr X’s rambler’s association asked for a modification order to the definitive map. The Council made the order in March 2004. The Council received seven objections to the modification order.
  4. In 2015, Mr X asked the Council for an update on the modification order. He said the Council told him the case was with its legal team.
  5. In August 2020, Mr X complained to the Ombudsman.
  6. In November 2020, Mr X told the Ombudsman the Council had confirmed it had referred the modification order to the Planning Inspectorate. Mr X asked the Ombudsman to withdraw his complaint.

Analysis

  1. I have discontinued my investigation. This is because the Council has now referred the matter to the Planning Inspectorate and Mr X has requested the Ombudsman withdraw his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I have discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings