The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council responded to the complainant’s request to change the name/address of her property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about the way the Council responded to her request to change the address of her home. She says an officer responded who knew nothing about the issues and she is still waiting for the Council to provide information. Ms X wants a senior officer to consider her re-naming request.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and the legislation relating to street naming. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
Ms X asked the Council to change the address of her property; she wants the address to reflect the name on the original deeds. She is unhappy about name changes the Council has approved for other properties in the area.
There has been a lot of correspondence and the Council has consulted external bodies and officers have sought internal advice. The Council explained to Ms X that the law gives it the power to approve or deny requests for name changes. The Council refused her request and provided reasons. Ms X disagrees with the outcome, and the reasons, and she does not think a highways officer should have responded to her complaint.
I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. I have considered the legislation and it confirms it is for the Council to decide what street names and numbers to use, “…as it sees fit”. In this case, the Council has decided to decline Ms X’s request and it has given reasons for that decision. Ms X disagrees but this does not mean the Council has done anything wrong. It is for the Council to decide on naming. We are not an appeal body and it is not for us to tell a council what street or house numbering system it to use.
Ms X has raised many points and asked many questions - I do not need to address them all to reach my decision. However, she says the Land Registry and Royal Mail both report that the naming system is causing confusing. She also questions why the Council chose to add a specific number to her address when there is a large numerical gap to the next numbered property (number 1). The Council says no external body has reported the addresses are causing confusion. It has also explained it chose the number for Ms X’s property to allow for the potential for other properties to be built.
There is also no suggestion of fault in the way the Council responded. It has provided detailed responses and, even though Ms X says she is waiting for additional information, the Council’s response is sufficient as a response to her request. It is for the Council to decide which officers will respond to a complaint and there is nothing in the response to suggest the officer was unaware of the issues or unable to provide an appropriate response.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman