The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with a claim for damage to the complainants car, caused by a falling tree branch. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with the matter and the issue of liability is a matter for the courts.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains about how the Council has dealt with an insurance claim he has submitted after a branch fell from a tree damaging his car. He says the Council has not responded to his claim meaning he is paying insurance and tax on a car he cannot use. Mr X would like the Council to take responsibility for the damage
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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(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)
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 lodged an insurance claim with the Council after a branch fell from a tree causing damage to his car. The Council has a contractor who maintains the highway, so Mr X’s claim was passed to the contractor who in turn passed it to their insurers. Mr X says the Council should take ownership and provide him with an update.
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Upon receipt of Mr X’s claim, the Council correctly passed on Mr X’s insurance claim to its relevant contractor. It apologised to Mr X for the delay in dealing with his claim and has recently asked the contractor to provide Mr X with an urgent response.
The insurers are still considering Mr X’s claim, if refused, he can challenge through the courts. As he has this alternative remedy available which we would reasonably expect him to use, this matter falls outside our jurisdiction and will not be investigated.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and the issue of liability can be challenged in court.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman