Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council responded to a highway obstruction. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not properly deal with his complaint about how it responded to him placing his bins on the pavement. He said since he removed the bins, cars park regularly on the pavement and have blocked his driveway. He said he feels at risk when reporting cars parked illegally. He wanted the Council to provide a written notice explaining why the bins were an obstruction, review its policy, and put up bollards to prevent parking on the pavement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X said he placed three wheelie bins on the pavement in front of his house to deter cars from parking on the pavement.
6. The Council said Mr X’s bins had been reported as an obstruction to the pavement in August 2024. The Council stated a staff member visited Mr X in August 2024 to informally request that the bins be removed from the pavement.
7. Mr X complained to the Council about the issue in December 2024, he said the Council had not used the correct legislation when it requested him to remove the bins.
8. The Council replied to Mr X in January 2025. Mr X asked the Council to consider his complaint at a second stage.
9. In its complaint response, the Council clarified that it had quoted the appropriate legislation of Highways Act 1980 when it asked Mr X to remove the bins as an obstruction to the highway. It noted the legislation Mr X had quoted in his complaint applied to residents that failed to follow the wheeled bin and recycling scheme.
10. The Council said its policy for responding to reports of obstruction to the highway was to inspect the site, then speak to the resident about the obstruction and ask for it to be removed. The Council thanked Mr X for removing the bins from the pavement on the day of the staff member’s visit.
11. Mr X asked the Council to consider measures to prevent drivers parking on the pavement. In its complaint response, the Council noted there were double yellow lines in place at the location and advised Mr X to report any incidents of parking on the pavement to the Council’s Parking Enforcement Team. It said it was mindful of installing additional preventative measures that would need long-term maintenance.
12. The Council acknowledged that it had missed an opportunity to consider Mr X’s complaint at stage one of the complaints process, and apologised for any frustration this may have caused him.
13. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the substantive events. The Council responded to a report of obstruction on the highway and asked Mr X to remove his bins. It explained its reasons for declining Mr X’s request for bollards.
14. Additionally, we will not investigate this complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint and apologised for not considering his complaint at stage one of the complaints process. It also advised Mr X how to report cars parked on the pavement. We cannot order the Council to put up bollards, nor would there be justification for recommending it review its policy in this case.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, and further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman