Street furniture and lighting

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Watford Borough Council (18 018 011)

    Statement Upheld Street furniture and lighting 05-Dec-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman discontinued his investigation, making no finding about fault, as the Council made a reasonable and suitable offer to resolve Mr X's complaint about moving a bus shelter near his property.

  • London Borough of Barnet (18 016 464)

    Statement Upheld Street furniture and lighting 05-Aug-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman found some fault by the Council on Miss L's complaint about its decision to relocate a bus stop outside of her house. While it properly carried out consultation, it failed to tell residents affected of its decision to implement the proposal. As Miss L did not own the house at the time of the consultation, the first she knew about it was when contractors started work outside. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

  • Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (18 017 299)

    Statement Upheld Street furniture and lighting 29-Jul-2019

    Summary: The Council failed to make written records about its decision to move footpath barriers closer to Ms X's home. The failure to keep records did not affect the Council's decision to move the barriers or, therefore, the position Ms X found herself in. The Council agreed to review its practices for keeping written records of its decisions.

  • Sheffield City Council (18 014 180)

    Statement Upheld Street furniture and lighting 13-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains about high levels of light intrusion from a street lamp positioned outside his mother's (Mrs Y's) property. He says this causes her distress. He also complains about delays in the Council's complaints process. The Council took appropriate action to reduce the level of light intrusion to within the recommended limits. However, there was some delay within the process. It has agreed to apologise to Mr X and his mother for the delay and pay Mrs Y £150 to acknowledge the distress caused.

  • South Norfolk District Council (18 010 996)

    Statement Not upheld Street furniture and lighting 28-Feb-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complains that the Council has not taken sufficient action to deal with excessive light spill from a new footway light. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision that light spill from a new footway light is not excessive.

  • Milton Keynes Council (18 005 042)

    Statement Upheld Street furniture and lighting 23-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about a broadband communications cabinet that has been installed next to his garden fence. He considers the cabinet poses a risk to the security of his property as someone could climb on to it and then into his garden. The Council has failed to provide evidence to show how it was satisfied that the cabinet needed to be sited in this location. The Council should, within a month of this decision, apologise for this and for how it responded to Mr B's complaint.

  • Surrey County Council (18 009 687)

    Statement Not upheld Street furniture and lighting 10-Jan-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council refused to install two directional signs to his nursery. There is no fault in the Council's decision and we do not uphold Mr X's complaint.

  • East Sussex County Council (18 008 558)

    Statement Upheld Street furniture and lighting 04-Dec-2018

    Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has taken 11 months to fit a shield to a street light outside her home. We uphold Mrs X's complaint and are satisfied with the remedy proposed by the Council.

  • Durham County Council (18 005 058)

    Statement Not upheld Street furniture and lighting 04-Dec-2018

    Summary: Mr F complains about the Council's decision to remove street lights on a road in his local area. The Ombudsman has not found fault.

  • Transport for London (18 005 511)

    Statement Upheld Street furniture and lighting 12-Nov-2018

    Summary: Mr C complains that a transport authority has not acted to address antisocial behaviour and damage caused to his property by its customers. He also complains the authority issued him with penalty charge notices for using a bus lane to access his property. There is no fault in how the authority reached its decisions. However, the authority is at fault in how it dealt with Mr C's complaint.