Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in fixing a streetlight. This is because the injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation and we could not add to the Council’s investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council delayed fixing a broken streetlight. He said the matter caused him frustration. He wants the Council to repair the light and to make service improvements to prevent a recurrence of fault. He also wants the Council to provide him with a financial remedy.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained the Council delayed fixing a broken streetlight near to where he resides.
6. In response to Mr X’s complaint, the Council accepted it had delayed responding to his initial concern. It also accepted it had poorly communicated with him in responding to his complaint and keeping him updated on any progress.
7. The Council explained its reasons for the delay and what it would do going forward to improve its services. It told Mr X of its next steps to fix the streetlight. Furthermore, the Council apologised to Mr X for the injustice caused and offered him a financial remedy.
8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because the Council took appropriate action to prevent a recurrence of fault. Its remedy to Mr X was appropriate and proportionate too. Any injustice caused to Mr X has therefore been minimised. We could not add to the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation and we could not add to the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman