Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the siting of a bus stop outside Mr X’s house. Part of the complaint is late without good reasons to investigate it now. For more recent events, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains, for over a year, he has suffered persistent trespass, damage and nuisance to his private property because the Council placed a bus stop directly outside his house. He says users of the bus stop frequently use his front wall as a bench, drop litter in his front garden and use his bins. Mr X says he is woken up early in the morning by groups loitering directly outside his window. When Mr X tried to ask people to stop, he says he was met with aggression.

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. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
6. The law 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

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mr X complains about matters dating back to late 2024 when he moved to his current property. Mr X first complained to us in February 2026. So, his complaint about issues before February 2025 is late. We will not investigate matters before February 2025 because I have seen no good reasons to exercise discretion.
10. In any event, so far as Mr X’s late complaint concerns the Council’s refusal of his request for a litter bin placement, we would not investigate this matter. The Council considered Mr X’s request and provided clear reasons for its refusal. It explained, in its professional judgment, introducing a litter bin outside Mr X’s property would likely unintentionally encourage fly-tipping and refuse dumping. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to justify investigating.
11. In May 2025, the Council sent Mr X its final complaint response. After considering Mr X’s complaint correspondence, including the additional evidence provided by Mr X in April, the Council said it was looking at options to make minor adjustments to the bus stop infrastructure. It said its review would establish the range of options to help reduce the impact of the bus stop. The Council said the next review meeting would take place at the end of June. While it explained the Council did not have the necessary funding to implement the measures immediately, the review process would allow the Council to identify a funding route for any works recommended through the review. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating. It considered the information and evidence Mr X provided and explained clearly the next steps it would take. Based on the evidence I have seen, the Council acted without undue delay when reaching its decision. So, we will not investigate Mr X’s complaint.
12. Any complaint about the Council’s action following its final complaint response in May is premature. This includes any complaint about the outcome of its review meeting or delays by the Council in completing any recommendations. It is reasonable to give the Council the chance to investigate and reply to such a complaint. It is open to Mr X to make a fresh complaint to the Ombudsman if he remains unhappy with its response.
13. Mr X complains the Council is responsible for damage to his property. We do not normally investigate complaints about damage to property. This is because such complaints are about whether an organisation has been negligent. The courts are in the best position to decide whether an organisation has been negligent. Also, unlike us, the courts can order a party to pay damages. So, we will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint. This matter is for the Council’s insurers and ultimately for the courts. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to follow this process.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint about the siting of a bus stop outside Mr X’s house. Part of the complaint is late without good reasons to investigate it now. For more recent events, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman