Rights of way


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Norfolk County Council (17 003 302)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 18-Aug-2017

    Summary: Mr X says the Council did not take enforcement action against a landowner for obstructing a footpath for over 10 years. No further action is needed to pursue this complaint as it is caught by the time restriction on the Ombudsman's power to investigate complaints.

  • Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council (16 011 509)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 01-Aug-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X's complaint because it is unlikely we will find fault in the Council's decision to upgrade a footpath near her home to a cycle path. Also, the upgrade does not cause Ms X significant enough personal injustice to justify the Ombudsman's involvement.

  • East Sussex County Council (17 005 374)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 24-Jul-2017

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's failure to have a policy for dealing with amendments to its List of Streets. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council's part which would warrant an investigation.

  • Leeds City Council (17 004 927)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 19-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr C's complaint about a refusal to create a right of way. If Mr C is dissatisfied with the Council's eventual decision on the matter it would be reasonable for him to appeal to the Secretary of State.

  • Dorset County Council (16 014 843)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 16-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B's complaint about the action the Council took regarding a pedestrian level crossing in her town in the period 1977 to1980. The Ombudsman could not now investigate effectively and so it is unlikely he could achieve the outcome sought by Mrs B.

  • Cornwall Council (17 001 608)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 24-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs C's complaint about the way the Council has dealt with obstruction of the grass verge. It is unlikely he would find fault by the Council.

  • Herefordshire Council (17 001 485)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 24-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B's complaint that the Council failed to comply with its duty to prevent the obstruction of a footpath because it is unlikely he would find the Council to be at fault and Mr B has not suffered significant enough injustice to justify the Ombudsman's involvement.

  • Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (16 013 474)

    Statement Upheld Rights of way 23-May-2017

    Summary: The Council delayed dealing with Mr and Mrs X's application to stop up part of a footpath and misadvised them about the potential costs. It has agreed to limit the costs to Mr and Mrs X to £1500 and to produce an action plan setting out how it will proceed with the application and the timescales involved.

  • Telford & Wrekin Council (16 011 812)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 15-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman does not have grounds to investigate this complaint that the Council has unreasonably restricted a resident's vehicular access along a lane in its area. This is because there is no sign of fault on its part regarding this matter.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (17 000 745)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 04-May-2017

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's demand that his mother applies for a dropped kerb to access her driveway. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. There is insufficient evidence of any fault on the Council's part which has caused injustice to Mr X or his mother.

;