Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council will not re-position a street light. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, complains the Council will not re-position a street light. Her daughter’s car has been hit twice since the light was moved to its current position. Mrs X wants the Council to move the light to its previous position.

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 an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I looked at images of the street and the light on streetview and considered comments Mrs X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

4. At least five years ago the Council installed new street lights across the city. I have seen the lighting plan for the road where Mrs X lives which is dated 2013. The Council installed new lights which included moving the light opposite Mrs X’s home a short distance.
5. Mrs X contacted the Council in 2021 to ask it to move the light back to its original position. She said the people who live on the opposite side of the road, near the light, have twice, in the last five years, hit her daughter’s car. Mrs X said the light makes it hard for her neighbours to drive on and off their drive.
6. In response the Council explained the new lights emit a different type of light which meant that some columns had to be moved to ensure an even spread of light and to ensure the light distribution meets the British Lighting Standards. It said it had taken into account factors such as traffic flow, road classification, pedestrians, local conditions and site observations. It said it has no plans to move the light because the current location is part of the design to meet the British Standards. However, it said it might be possible for Mrs X, or her neighbour, to pay to move the light.
7. Mrs X is dissatisfied with the response. She says her daughter has to park outside the house due to a disability and, since the light was moved, the neighbours have twice reversed into the car. Mrs X is worried the car will again be hit. She wants the Council to move the light back to the previous position.

Assessment

8. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The light was moved more than five years ago as part of a project to update the streetlighting. Its location is part of a detailed plan to meet the lighting standards and to ensure an even spread of light. I have looked at images of the street and there is no obvious reason why the light, in its current position, should cause a problem and it does not obstruct any driveways. There is no reason for the Council to move the light, and pay for it from public funds, because the light is in the position identified in the design plan as the correct location. We do not act as an appeal body and we cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with.
9. Mrs X, or her neighbours, could seek permission to pay to move the light although it could be that consent would only be granted if the revised location still met the lighting standards.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman