The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about grass cutting at a nature reserve. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and there is no evidence the Council has caused Mr X a significant personal injustice.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council has cut the grass at the edge of a path at the nature reserve and has cut further back than usual. Mr X said this has destroyed wildflowers and wildlife habitats.
Mr X said this has caused upset for himself and other people that visit the nature reserve.
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: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained the Council has cut further back than usual when cutting grass at the edge of a path at the nature reserve.
In its complaint response, the Council said it has not cut the grass any more than usual and said it was committed to biodiversity and habitat preservation.
We will not investigate because there is not enough evidence of fault given the Council’s explanation. Additionally, we provide a free service, but must use public money carefully by investigating those cases which have had a significant impact. There is no evidence the Council’s actions caused Mr X a significant personal injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman