The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to serve an abatement notice as it was reasonable for Miss X to appeal this in court.
The complaint
Miss X complains about the Council’s decision to serve her with an abatement notice and is unhappy it gave the press incorrect information about her.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) 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, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Miss X.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council served Miss X with an abatement notice, asking her to stop action it considered was a statutory nuisance.
Miss X had the right to appeal to the magistrate’s court against the abatement notice and it was reasonable for her to do so. Therefore, I will not investigate.
There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions providing information to the press and we cannot say this directly caused Miss X significant injustice. Therefore, I will not investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it was reasonable for her to appeal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman