The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about the Council’s decision to construct a shared cycle path in a local park. This is because the decision has not caused Mr C significant injustice.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr C, complains the Council decided to build a shared cycle path in a local path without consulting members of the public. He is worried the scheme will be dangerous for pedestrians who should be able to visit the park without fear of speeding cyclists.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr C and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council voted to approve the shared cycle path in 2015 but it is reliant on funding from outside sources. Mr C says the Council has not yet proceeded with the scheme.
The Ombudsman has no power to stop the Council from proceeding with the proposal and cannot hold a public inquiry into the matter as Mr C would like. Our role is to look at matters which have already taken place, cause significant injustice to individuals and raise issues of public interest. In this case it is unclear if the scheme will proceed, and we cannot therefore say the decision causes Mr C injustice or that we should investigate on public interest grounds.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the matter has not caused Mr C significant injustice.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman