Following a recent Freedom of Information request to identify why some of the estate roads in the vicinity of my property were not adopted earlier I was contacted by the Information Commissioners office who informed me they had just been told by the council that some of the roads in question were just about to be adopted by the council.
Whilst this had no bearing on my FOI request it was nevertheless interesting that the ICO should contradict what an LGO investigator had told me 2 years ealier. During the investigation into my complaint the LGO investigator told me that all the roads on the estate, save for a very small stretch in the vicinity of my properly, were adopted.
However, at that time NONE of the highways on phase 1 or phase 2 of the development had been adopted so I knew that was not true. When I confronted the investigator they told me that they validated everything they are told by a council officer.
Given the facts there is only one conclusion you can reach, the LGO investigator blatantly lied to me. If they argue that they only told me what a council officer had told them they must have lied lied about validating everything a council officer tells them.
Following my research it is obvious that they don't validate everything they are told by council officers. However, which is worse the fact that, they are prepared to overlook a council officer lying to them, they are willing to conspire with council officers and pass on their lies or they base the outcome of their investigation on council officer lies?
If any of the Local Government Ombudsman would like to answer that question I would be willing to post their response.