The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not maintaining the streetlights on the private road where he lives, or how it responded to his enquiries and complaint. We cannot resolve the dispute at the core of the complaint, which is one of legal liability, so investigation would not lead to any different outcome. It is not unreasonable for Mr X and the residents’ management company to take the matter to court. We do not investigate councils’ correspondence or complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issue giving rise to the complaint.
The complaint
Mr X lives on a private road and is involved with the residents’ management company. He complains the Council has: incorrectly refused to maintain the streetlights in the road; has misrepresented the facts when responding to his questions about its ownership of the lights and its maintenance role.
Mr X says the residents worry about dangers posed to life by faults with the lights. Some of the streetlights are leaning while others do not work, making the road dark for residents, including for children. He says some lights in disrepair have live exposed electrical parts. Mr X says the complaint process and his attempts to resolve the matter have caused him distress. He wants the Council to accept and continue with its responsibility to maintain the lights to the same standard as the rest of its network, and apologise for the way it has dealt with the matter.
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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (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 from Mr X, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The main issue in Mr X’s complaint is whether the Council is and should continue to be responsible for the maintenance and power supply of the streetlights. Mr X says the Council has maintained the lights until recently. He considers its previous involvement, possibly with installing, maintaining and powering the lights, means they are required to continue this arrangement. He believes the Council adopted the lights despite them being on a private road. The Council disagrees. It has referred the issue to its legal team to reach its view. The Council has decided it does not have a duty or liability to maintain the streetlights because they are on a private road which is not part of their highway network, and denies it has adopted them. It considers it should not use further public monies for the highway network on private estates.
We cannot resolve this dispute. To do so, we would need to determine the Council is legally liable for the lights’ ongoing maintenance and running costs. But we cannot make such legal rulings. We will not investigate the matter because we cannot resolve the dispute at the core of the complaint, so investigation would not lead to any different outcome.
To get the key outcome Mr X and the residents’ management company seek, a finding that the Council is liable for the maintenance and running of the lights, they would need to go to court. The courts can make the legal ruling required to resolve that core dispute. They would consider the evidence from both sides and make a binding decision. We could only make a recommendation. For these reasons, it would not be unreasonable for Mr X and the residents’ management company to take the matter to court.
Mr X has also complained about how the Council responded to his enquiries and complaint. We do not investigate councils’ correspondence or complaint‑handling in isolation when we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to the correspondence or complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to do so. That limitation applies here so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because: we cannot resolve the legal dispute at the core of the complaint so investigation would not lead to any different outcome; and it is not unreasonable for him and the residents’ management company to take the matter to court; and we do not investigate council correspondence or complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issue giving rise to the complaint.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman