The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to shrubs on the complainant’s property and the Council’s handling of his complaint. It is not unreasonable to expect the complainant to go to court if his claim is not resolved to his satisfaction.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I have referred to as Mr B, complained that shrubs on his property were damaged by the Council’s contactors who had entered without authorisation and about the Council’s handling of his complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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) We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr B told us he first contacted the Council about the damage in May 2021. There then followed a series of correspondence between Mr B, the council and another local authority. Eventually, in March 2022, the Council told Mr B it had passed its claim to its insurer. Mr B told us he is not asking us to adjudicate on his claim. He said the Council should give full, timely, and proper consideration to the substance of the claim, including its acceptance of responsibility for the damage caused, and urgently provide a full response as to how it intends to make amends.
We do not normally investigate complaints about damage to property. This is because only a court of law, ultimately, can decide whether a council is liable for what has happened and can enforce an award of damages. So, we would usually expect someone in Mr B’s position to seek a remedy in the courts if the claim has not been resolved through insurers. I do not consider there is any exceptional reason why Mr B cannot do this if he does not agree with the outcome of his claim.
Mr B has complained he has encountered much unnecessary delay and prevarication from the Council. He said he has been passed back and forth between two councils. Mr B said the way the Council has dealt with the matter has caused much anxiety and has wasted time. In March 2022 the Council told Mr B, although it did not accept liability, in the light of the time taken and to thank him for bringing a mapping error to its attention, it would offer a payment of £200 as a goodwill gesture. Where we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to a claim or complaint, we will not investigate a council’s internal processes in isolation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is not unreasonable to expect him to go to court if his claim is not resolved to his satisfaction.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman