Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance. This is because there is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council failing to maintain the footway alongside his village main street by allowing it to be restricted by vegetation. He says when the growth is at its height it is necessary to step on the highway to avoid brambles and nettles. He wants the Council to keep the footway clear.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X reported overgrown vegetation on the footway in his village. The Council says he may have reported this to East Suffolk Council as it had no records of his report on its reporting system. When he made a complaint about the lack of action the Council investigated and advise him that it would not cut back vegetation outside its programmed service. The hedges involved may be privately-owned and would require the co-operation of the landowners.
6. The Council says it raised an order to clear parts of the footway, but this had not yet been completed. It intends to deal with the problem under its reactive repairs system, but this is subject to a hierarchy of priority according to risk and the number of users affected.
7. Not all complaints received by us are accepted for investigation. The legislation gives us discretion as to whether a complaint should be pursued and, in reaching that decision, a preliminary assessment is made. We have to take account of the degree of injustice sustained and whether there is any realistic chance of achieving a satisfactory outcome. In this case the Council has accepted that the work will be carried out but has not prioritised it as being urgent.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance. This is because there is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman