Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s delay in carrying out improvement works to a footpath close to his home. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr B, says the Council has delayed and dissembled with regard to action it will take to address hazardous cycling and the lack of lighting on a footpath near his home. He says this has caused an unacceptable health and safety issue.

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, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Mr B and the Council. I gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

What I found

4. At the end of 2018 Mr B contacted his local councillor with his concerns about the hazard caused by cyclists cycling on the narrow lane by his home on which cycling is prohibited, and about the lack of lighting along it.
5. The councillor referred the matter to an officer who visited the site and advised Mr B that he would monitor the situation and that the Council might consider putting no cycling signs up if necessary. The officer also said the supermarket nearby provided lighting to the path.
6. In May 2019 Mr B contacted the Council to complain about cyclists racing passed him when he was walking on the path. He said he had found the earlier officer response to his concerns to have been disappointing and asked that it be reviewed.
7. In August the officer told Mr B he had ordered some no cycling signs which he hoped would help with any conflict between pedestrians and cyclists. Dissatisfied with the responses he received when he had chased up the matter, Mr B progressed his complaint to Stage 2 of the Council’s complaints procedure. In its response the Council advised the signs would be ordered and that consideration was being given to adopting the footpath and to carrying out surface improvement works to the lane.
8. In responding to my request for information on this complaint the Council has confirmed the “Cyclists Dismount” signs have been ordered and will be installed by the end of March 2020. It has also advised that work to resurface the worst affected section of the path will be completed by the end of the current financial year. With regard to street lighting, the Council said that it is under no obligation, and has no funding, to install streetlights in the location or elsewhere on the rights of way network.

Assessment

9. It is the Council’s role to determine what works to undertake and what priority to give them. While I understand Mr B has pursued the matter for some time, and would have liked the works to have been completed sooner, there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.
10. Mr B says his complaint requires a full investigation by the Ombudsman. However, we are a publicly funded body and must use the funds allocated to us in an efficient, economic and effective manner and we do not investigate every complaint we receive. The Council has set out the action it is taking and why it has not been able to do all that Mr B would have liked in the time frame he would have liked.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman