Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has failed to cut back and maintain hedges affecting local footpaths. There is no Council fault in deciding what action to take and no injustice caused to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to cut back a hedge which is affecting the use of a footpath along the main road and making it ‘inaccessible’. He says he is forced to walk on the grass verge/mud. Mr X says the Council is failing in its duty to maintain or cut back hedges and vegetation. It has done limited work since he reported the problem in March 2020 and he wants it to do more.
2. Mr X complains the Council’s communication has been poor and its complaint reply failed to consider his photograph of the problem. Mr X says he has sent the Council 65 emails.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered Mr X’s information and comments. The information includes a photograph of the footpath and the Council’s reply to the complaint. I have considered internet street scene photographs of the area.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint for the following reasons:
6. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision on the location which Mr X is primarily concerned about. Where there is no fault the Ombudsman cannot lawfully question the decision. The Council visited the site, considered relevant evidence, and found the path was useable. Although there is a reduction in width the path is not obstructed. Mr X’s photograph shows the assessment is correct. The Council says its area maintenance engineer reviewed and confirmed the decision. The Council says it intends cutting back some hedges during this financial year having regard to likely growth during the summer and other priorities.
7. The Council has not caused Mr X an injustice. The complaint reply is a detailed explanation of its responsibilities, powers, actions on Mr X’s concerns, and proposed actions. It has also referred to the impact on highway maintenance of a limited budget.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council has failed to cut back and maintain hedges affecting local footpaths. There is no Council fault in deciding what action to take and no injustice caused to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman