Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the inaccessibility of a public right of way. The complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now. Mr Y has also not suffered significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains about the inaccessibility of a footpath, which is recorded as a public right of way.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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)
4. 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:

• 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), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr Y and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr Y complained to the Council in August 2023 about the inaccessibility of a footpath which is recorded as a public right of way. The Council provided a final response to Mr Y in October 2023.
8. We expect a person to complain to us within 12 months of being aware of a matter and Mr Y did not raise his complaint with us until April 2026. This complaint is therefore late. I understand the issue regarding the footpath is unusual and complex. It relates to a planning application approved in 2008 by a former district authority that ceases to exist. I am satisfied the Council continues to consider solutions for accommodating the footpath.
9. The more time passes between the events and a complaint, the more unlikely it is we can investigate them effectively, gather reliable evidence and reach a sound decision. In older cases we also may not be able to achieve a meaningful remedy because too many circumstances have changed. We are often unable to be able to show why events occurred or understand who was responsible.
10. Even if the complaint was not late, we would not investigate it. This is because there is insufficient evidence of Mr Y suffering significant personal injustice because of the footpath being inaccessible.
11. We will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by an organisation. In addition, we will not normally investigate a complaint where the complainant is using their enquiry as a way of raising a wider community campaign about something of general concern, but where they have not suffered injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because the complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now. Mr Y has also not suffered significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman