The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged by an unmarked speed hump. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
The complaint
Mr B says his car was damaged by an unmarked speed hump. Mr B complains the Council’s insurers have refused his compensation claim for the damage to his car even though the Council raised a works order to mark this speed hump after the incident. Mr B says he was injured in the incident and his repair costs were £24,000. Mr B would like the Council to pay him compensation and mark the speed hump which caused the damage to his car.
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 Act 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 Mr B.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr B complains his car was damaged because the Council failed to mark a speed hump to warn motorists to reduce their speed. Mr B says this speed hump was invisible and was the only unmarked speed hump on this road.
So, in effect, Mr B’s complaint is that the Council has been negligent.
The Council’s insurers have considered Mr B’s claim for compensation but did not accept the Council is liable for the damage to his car. Mr B may pursue his claim by taking the Council to court.
The role of the Ombudsman is to consider complaints of administrative fault. We take the view negligence claims are best decided by an organisation’s insurers, and if needed, the courts.
Deciding whether an organisation has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way at evidence as only the court can to make its findings. In addition, only a court can decide if an organisation has been negligent and so should pay damages. We cannot recommend actions or payments that ‘punish’ the organisation.
I cannot decide whether the Council has been negligent and have no powers to enforce an award of damages. So, I would usually expect someone in Mr B’s position to seek a remedy in the courts, directly or through his insurers.
I find it is reasonable and proportionate to expect Mr B to pursue his claim at court particularly because the compensation he seeks is a significant sum.
So, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to take the Council to court.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman