Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about use of a public right of way. There is insufficient evidence of fault, we cannot achieve what Mr X wants and there are other bodies better placed to consider concerns about private access rights or alleged road traffic offences.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to act on his concerns about misuse of a public right of way or take appropriate enforcement action to ensure its proper use. He wants the Council to speak to the persons he considers are misusing the right of way and take appropriate enforcement action.

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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In its complaint response, the Council set out its duties in relation to public rights of way. It said Its role is to maintain public rights or way and ensure they are not obstructed. It said it was not responsible for determining private vehicular access rights or taking action in relation to road traffic offences. It said these were either private civil matters or in the case of an alleged traffic offence, a matter for the Police. It said when it visited to the site, the footpath was in good condition and not obstructed, so it would not take further action.
7. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council’s duties in relation to public rights of way are limited to ensuring the right of way remains clear and available for access. In response to Mr X’s concerns, it visited the site and was satisfied it was clear and in good condition and so it would not take further action. This is a decision the Council is entitled to reach and its has explained its reasoning to Mr X. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
8. We could not require the Council to speak with the persons Mr X considers are misusing the right of way or require it to take enforcement action, and so could not achieve what Mr X wants.
9. If Mr X considers persons are trespassing on private land or committing motoring offenses, it is open to him to seek legal advice or report his concerns to the Police.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and we cannot achieve what he wants. Any complaint about trespass on private land or motoring offences are better considered by the courts or the Police.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman