Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint the Council wants him to pay a fee to relocate a street light. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, complains the Council’s decision to place a street light in its current location was flawed. And Mr B complains the Council wants him to pay £2900 for it to move the street light so he can extend his driveway. Mr B wants the Council to move the light at no cost to him.

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 of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered the information provided by Mr B and the complaint correspondence between Mr B and the Council. I sent a draft decision to Mr B and considered the comments he made in reply before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr B has explained he has recently moved to his current property. He wants to widen the entrance to his driveway to allow two vehicles to park in front of his house. There is a street light on the pavement that will prevent Mr B from carrying out the required work. Mr B has asked the Council to move the street light and it has agreed but says Mr B must pay the £2900 cost of the work.
7. Mr B says the Council’s decision to move the street light in 2007 to its current location was flawed. This is because other street lights are placed at property boundaries. The street light outside Mr B’s house stands on the pavement halfway across his frontage.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate a complaint about how the Council decided on the location for the street light in 2007. That decision was made more than 12 months ago and the restriction in paragraph 3 applies. The complaint is late. There are no good reasons for the Ombudsman to exercise his discretion and now investigate a complaint about the 2007 decision. This is because Mr B was aware of the position of the street light when he moved to his property. If he was unhappy with it, he could have decided not to complete the purchase.
9. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint the Council will only move the street light if he pays the costs involved. Further consideration of this complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council. The Council has no duty to move the street light, or to use public funds to carry out work for the benefit of Mr B. The Council has assessed the street lighting levels and decided it can agree to Mr B’s request to move the street light, provided Mr B pays the cost of this. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body and there are no reasons to criticise the way the Council has made its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman