Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (24 003 360)

Category : Transport and highways > Rights of way

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 29 Aug 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in resolving issues relating to a highway improvement scheme and a Compulsory Purchase Order. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to refer the matter to the Upper Tribunal.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to resolve issues on rights of way, easements and payment of legal costs following a compulsory purchase order.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

  1. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X wants the Council to reimburse him for his legal costs and resolve the right of way and easement issues.
  2. The Council confirms it is following the legal process to resolve the complex legal issues arising from a main A-road improvement scheme and associated Compulsory Purchase Orders.
  3. The Land Compensation Act allows people to make a claim against a council where they are affected by the implementation of a compulsory purchase order. Mr X or the Council can refer a dispute about the settlement of the claim to the Upper Tribunal for determination.
  4. Mr X has the right to seek a remedy from the tribunal. Parliament set up a specific right of appeal to the Tribunal. It can determine the claim, whereas the Ombudsman cannot. Therefore, I have decided not to investigate the complaint because it would be reasonable to expect Mr X to exercise his right to appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate because Mr X has the right to seek a remedy from a tribunal, and it is reasonable to expect him to use that right.

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