Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about street lighting. This is because there is not significant enough injustice to justify our involvement and it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council handled the complaint where we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains the Council has failed to ensure street lighting on his road has been repaired. He is also unhappy with the Council’s response to his complaint.
2. Mr Y says he is worried about the safety of others and a greater risk of burglary with the lights being off. He feels the Council dismissed his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
4. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Streetlights on Mr Y’s roads stopped working in December 2021. Several residents in the road reported this to the Council. The Council inspected the site and found the problem was with the underground power supply. It reported this to the local electricity board and updated residents in January 2022. It said it would expect the electricity company to fix the lights within 25 working days.
7. The Council provided a further update to residents in February, explaining that it was waiting for two electricity companies to fix the underground problem. It said it had continued to chase this and has asked for the work to be done as soon as possible.
8. Mr Y complained to the Council about the delay in fixing the streetlights. The Council responded to say it could not fix the issue itself as the cause of the problem was damage to the power supply cables. It said it could not repair this as this would be the responsibility of the electricity supplier.
9. Mr Y then approached us in February. Mr Y confirmed to us the electricity companies had repaired the lights in early March.

Analysis

10. As the electricity company has now repaired the lights, any remaining injustice would be limited to the worry Mr Y experienced. While Mr Y may have been concerned for the safety of residents, this would not be a significant enough injustice to warrant our involvement in this complaint. Consequently, we will not investigate this issue.
11. As we are not investigating the substantive matter, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council handled Mr Y’s complaint. Consequently, we will not be investigating this further complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not significant enough injustice to justify our involvement. Also it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council handled the complaint where we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman