Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Modification Order. This is because it is late with no good reason to investigate it now.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains the Council was biased in its decision to make a Modification Order to include a bridleway on its Definitive Map and failed to properly assess the information presented.
2. Mr Y feels the Council’s decision has undermined his rights as a resident and feels the process has not been fair.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. A third party made an application to the Council to modify the Definitive Map to include a bridleway in 2002. The Council had advised the third party to gather witness statements to show the bridleway had been in use for several years and that there was support for it being included in the Definitive Map. Mr Y feels the statements provided were therefore biased in favour of the bridleway being included. He says this led to the Council’s decision to make an Order being biased too.
6. The Council then published the Order, inviting comments and objections to the Order in a consultation period. Mr Y provided his objections to the Order so the matter was passed to the Planning Inspectorate. The Planning Inspectorate held a public inquiry into the Order in August 2008, a public hearing in March 2012 before determining that the Order should be confirmed to add the routes to the Definitive Map in 2013.
7. Mr Y says he contacted the Council repeatedly to complain about the matter over the years, including writing to the Council in 2018 and more recently in 2021.
8. The Council responded to his complaint, denying fault in January 2022, explaining that the matter had been considered by the Planning Inspectorate, whose decision was only appealable by judicial review at the High Court. It then referred Mr Y to us. Mr Y contacted us in March 2022.

Analysis

9. The law says people should normally complain to us within 12 months of becoming aware of an issue. Complaints brought to the Ombudsman more than 12 months after someone becomes aware of something a council has done are considered late. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons.
10. Mr Y’s was aware of his reason to complain about the Council’s actions when he raised his objections to the Order being made during the original public consultation in approximately 2002, more than 12 months ago. He was also aware when he attended the Planning Inspectorate’s public inquiry in August 2008 and when he contacted the Council about the matter in 2018. Consequently, his complaint is now late.
11. We have discretion to disapply the rule outlined in paragraph three where we decide there are good reasons. Mr Y has not provided any good reasons why he did not bring his complaint to us within 12 months of knowing about the matter. As he was able to contact both the Planning Inspectorate and the Council during the time that has passed, it is reasonable to expect him to have complained to us sooner. Consequently, there are no good reason to use discretion to investigate this complaint now.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because the complaint is late with no good reason to investigate it now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman