Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council allowing the installation of a communication firm’s cabinet next to the front wall of his house, and its refusal to fund its relocation. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in permitting the cabinet’s installation to warrant us investigating. Even if there were such fault, Mr X bought the house when the cabinet was already there. It was Mr X’s decision to buy the property which has directly resulted in his involvement in the situation causing him his claimed injustices. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants from his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X owns and lives in a property with a communication company’s cabinet on the pavement, next to his front wall. He complains the Council:
1. improperly allowed the company to install the cabinet in front of his house;
2. is unfairly refusing to pay the costs of removing the cabinet.
2. Mr X says the communication company has quoted him £30,000 for it to remove the cabinet, which he cannot afford. He says the matter has caused him a lot of stress as the cabinet has stopped his plan to get a vehicle crossover and off‑street parking. He considers this is a breach of his rights to have a crossover. Mr X says he cannot achieve the required value for his property, to get it remortgaged and try to prevent it from being repossessed. He wants the Council to pay the communication company’s fee to relocate the cabinet away from his property and so it is not in anyone’s way.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained;
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information from Mr X, online maps and images of Mr X’s property, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X’s complaint on the Council’s involvement in the cabinet’s installation is about events from approximately 20 years ago. The Council says it did not have the authority to stop the communication firm installing a cabinet, and could not tell it where it should be located. They say sometimes firms advise where they intend to fit a cabinet, but not in this case. Even if they do receive such a notification, officers could only object if the proposed location was a possible risk to public. They could not object for any other reason, such as it preventing the future installation of a resident’s off-street parking. There is not enough evidence of Council fault in its role in the installation of the cabinet to warrant investigation of that matter now.
6. Even if there were evidence of Council fault when the cabinet was installed in front of Mr X’s house, that event about 20 years ago is not what has directly caused his claimed injustices. I say this because online images of Mr X’s property show the cabinet was in place at least nine years before he bought the house. So the event which has directly led to the injustices Mr X claims was his decision to buy the property about five years ago.
7. I realise Mr X now wants to install off-street parking, which he says is prevented by the cabinet. He wants the Council to fund the cost of the work to remove it. But the cabinet’s presence and location would have been a factor in the valuation of the property ever since it was put there. There is no duty on the Council to fund works by the communication firm to help increase the facilities, value and desirability of Mr X’s property solely for his benefit. We cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants which is a further reason why we will not investigate his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
• there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its involvement of the cabinet’s installation to warrant us investigating; and
• even if there were such evidence of Council fault, it was not a Council action which directly led to the injustices he now claims; and
• we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants from his complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman