The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway repair and maintenance because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
The complaint
Mr Y complained the Council has failed to repair a pavement, which is closed, blocking the pavement for a few metres.
Mr Y says he has to cross the pavement twice when using the road to get past the blocked pavement, causing him inconvenience.
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 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered a serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss of injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
While Mr Y may need to cross the road to avoid the pavement, this is not a serious harm or loss and the inconvenience caused is not significant. We must use public funds carefully. As the injustice allegedly caused is not significant enough to justify our involvement, we will not investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman