Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s response to his report of a faulty streetlight near his home. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which has caused significant injustice to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s failure to give him a timeline for when a faulty streetlight near his home will be repaired.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint and he has been given the opportunity to comment on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X reported a faulty streetlight near his home to the Council. The Council replied sixteen days later and advised him that it would repair the lamp when next carrying out repairs in the area. It informed him that only lamps which are dangerous through exposed wiring or damaged columns are repaired urgently. The Council’s website contains similar information. Mr X complained to us three days after the Council’s response.
5. Councils do not have a statutory duty to provide streetlighting. Where they do for highway purposes, they may establish their own procedures for maintaining the system. Mr X complained only a few weeks after reporting the faulty light and the Council had already explained its reasons for carrying our low priority repairs on an area basis for reasons of economy of resources.
6. 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. In this case the Council explained the reasons for its delay related to the policy in a reasonable time.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which has caused significant injustice to warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman