Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has failed to maintain the footpath outside his property, which has led to the surface deteriorating over a period of two years.
2. Mr Y says the footpath is now a potential safety hazard and he is having to risk damaging his vehicle when he crosses over the footpath to access the highway from his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr Y initially contacted the Council about a defect in the footpath outside his property in 2022. The Council inspected the site but found that immediate works were not necessary as there was no risk to the public.
6. Mr Y complained again in 2024. The site was inspected again in May 2024. The Council has a section on its website on which residents can track defects and the work the Council has done to assess and where necessary carry out repairs. Mr Y was referred to this when he complained about the lack of repair in August 2024. He was also referred to the Council’s policy on how it prioritises repairs. The Council’s response said the disrepair issue would be corrected as part of a planned highway maintenance programme.
7. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. In this case, the Council has considered the defect, both initially in 2022 and in 2024 and assessed its priority in accordance with its policy. At both points, the Council has found that there was not a safety hazard which needed an immediate repair to make it safe. It has therefore categorised the work needed at a lower level, where it will consider a repair as part of other planned maintenance.
8. While Mr Y may be dissatisfied with the decision outcome, as the Council has considered the issue properly, in accordance with its policy and relevant information, there is not enough evidence of fault in the decision-making process to justify investigating the complaint. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman