Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that he injured himself when he tripped over a bollard, which the Council had not made clearly visible to pedestrians. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his claim for compensation at court, which is in the best position to decide the matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr B, complains that he tripped over a bollard which the Council had not clearly marked to make it visible to pedestrians. Mr B says he was severely injured and dislocated his shoulder. Mr B complains the Council has wrongly not accepted liability for the injuries he suffered. Mr B also complains about the Council’s handling of his claim for compensation, including that the Council delayed responding to his letters.

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. The Act says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr B.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s insurers have considered Mr B’s claim for compensation but did not accept the Council is liable for the injuries he suffered. Mr B may pursue his claim by taking the Council to court.
7. The role of the Ombudsman is to consider complaints of administrative fault. We cannot decide liability in complaints about personal injury. This is for the Council’s insurers and ultimately for the courts. Only the court can decide if the Council has been negligent. The court can assess what damages, if any, the Council should pay. Also, unlike the Ombudsman, the court can order a party to pay damages.
8. I find it is reasonable for Mr B to take the Council to court and Mr B has said he is willing to do this if needed.
9. Because we will not investigate Mr B’s main complaint about the injuries he suffered, an investigation solely into the Council’s handling of his claim is not justified.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to take the Council to court.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman