Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about not removing a sign blocking a path. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council have not taken adequate steps to remove a sign blocking a path.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information provided by the complainant and I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. A local business uses a A-board sign on the path near their premises to advertise.
5. Miss X complains the sign frequently blocks the path and the Council have not taken adequate steps to remove the sign.
6. The Council inspected the sign but found it was not blocking the path during their inspections. However, they agree the sign was blocking the path in the photos provided by Miss X. The Council have asked the business to make sure the sign is not blocking the path and have agreed to reinspect and remove the sign if they find it is blocking the path.
7. There is not enough evidence of fault here to warrant an investigation. The Council investigated Miss X’s report, acted, and agreed to monitor to ensure compliance.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman