The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council ending the street cleaning service for a private road. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to withdraw street cleaning service for the private street where he lives. He says it has done this since the development was completed and as a council taxpayer, he should have the service maintained.
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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X says the Council recently stopped street cleaning services for the development where he lives. He says there have been notable amounts of rubbish accumulating and residents have been obliged to remove it themselves. As a council taxpayer he believes he should benefit from this public service. He complained to the Council.
The Council told him that the street where he lives is a private street and the highway was never adopted by the Council because the developer failed to complete the section 38 adoption process when it was built 22 years ago. The Council has been providing street cleaning since that time but it has withdrawn this service to concentrate its resources on public highways for which it has a duty to provide street cleaning.
Mr X feels it is the Council’s failure to adopt the street which has led to the loss of service. The adoption procedure requires a developer to deposit a bond and then provide highway infrastructure up to a level where the Council accepts it for adoption. The developer must complete the works and the necessary plans and forms before the Council will inspect it and approve it if it meets the standards.
The Council says the developer has not completed the procedure and, despite contact with the developer in more recent years, the street remains private with knowledge of the developer. This means the Council is not required to provide the services associated with adopted highways, of which street cleansing is one. Mr X is a council taxpayer but the payments are for public services and this does not extend to private land for highways functions.
There is no fault in the Council withdrawing a service for a street which is not a public highway. The developer has not made any recent contact to have the street adopted and so currently remains responsible for the maintenance of the street.
Final decision
We will not investigate
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman