The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about damage to his vehicle he said was caused by a Council owned bollard. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to take the matter to court.
The complaint
Mr X complained his vehicle was damaged by a Council bollard. Mr X said the bollard was non-reflective and difficult to see.
Mr X said the matter caused him frustration and distress.
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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X said his vehicle was damaged when he drove into a Council owned bollard. Mr X said the bollard was not to national standards. Mr X wrote to the Council and requested a claim for damages via the Council’s insurers. He told the Council it was negligent.
The Council responded and rejected Mr X’s claim and any liability for damage to his vehicle.
We will not investigate this complaint. The role of the Ombudsman is to consider complaints of administrative fault. We cannot decide liability in complaints about damage to property or decide whether the Council has been negligent. Only the courts can do this.
The Council has rejected Mr X’s claim for damages. It is now open to Mr X to take the matter to court, and it is reasonable to expect Mr X to do so because only a court can make the determination he wants.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to take the matter to court.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman