Dear XYZ,
Reference: CF-Case-716949641
Firstly, please accept my apologies that you have felt it necessary to escalate this complaint and for any inconvenience this matter has continued to cause you.
I have undertaken further investigation into your complaint and confirm my response below: However firstly might we apologise most sincerely for the delay in providing you with a response to your query.
I have looked into how this delay might have occurred so as to provide you with some form of explanation as to why you did not receive a timely response. Having done so it appears that when you first sought to log your query the system, rather than having been allocated to a named officer to was allocated incorrectly to "unauthenticated user". We believe this may have been caused by a typo made our end when logging your complaint allocating your complaint to a former member of staff who's user account has since been deleted and as a result your complaints were trapped in some form of electronic limbo. We are currently in the process of a departmental re-organisation and to hopefully reduce the likelihood of this happening again all teams within Natural Infrastructure and Street Services are checking and updating their contact details and areas of responsibility on the Firmstep system we use to handle feedback, compliments and complaints.
I hope this explanation and the action we have taken goes some way towards reassuring you that we take all feedback, whether positive or negative, seriously and we again apologise for that.
Turning to the substantive issue of your original query you contacted us regarding a section of the South West Coast Path at Turnchapel which was closed in 2019/20. You state this path is a public right of way which Plymouth City Council had closed and diverted onto an alternative route which you felt was inferior. You wanted to know why we did not follow the statutorily prescribed process for the diversion of a public right of way and requested that we re-open the path as a result of our failure to comply with the law.
I can certainly assist you in better understanding our actions relating to the closure of this section of the nationally important South West Coast Path.
All public rights of way are recorded on the Definitive Map and Statement. Together the map and statement form the public record of public rights of way and the inclusion of a path on the Definitive Map is conclusive evidence in law of the existence, route and status of each public public right of way recorded upon it.
You can view a copy of the Definitive Map and Statement online at https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/public-rights-way
As you will see the section of the South West Coast Path you refer to in your complaint is not a way recorded on the Definitive Map.
Whilst the Definitive Map is conclusive evidence in law of the rights shown upon it the reverse is not necessarily true, which is to say that because a way is not shown on the Definitive Map does not mean that public rights do not exist over it and be subject to a current claim or claimed and proven at some point in the future. However, the absence of a route on the Definitive Map does mean that the provisions associated with the diversion or extinguishment of a public right of way under the Highways Act 1980, or the parallel powers contained within the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, do not bite should the path be diverted or extinguished. As such, when the path was closed there was no requirement for any of the provisions of the Public Path Order process and this is why there was no public consultation nor any opportunity for the public to object to its closure.
A reasonable person might well say that despite the paths public status, or lack of, Plymouth City Council knew the path was well used by the public and should have provided at least some advance notice or option for the public to have some say in the matter before the path was closed. This therefore brings us to your second grounds of complaint relating to our closure of the path.
The answer to that query is simple, it was not Plymouth City Council who closed the path. The closure was effected by the private landowner and Plymouth City Council were not given any advance notice of the closure nor were we informed it had been closed until we began receiving complaints from the public about the matter.
Once we became aware of the issue we visited the site and met with the landowner's representative, and the Trails Officer for the South West Coast Path Association (the charity who manage and promote the SWCP). The landowner informed us that they had closed the path as an emergency measure due to the significant risk to the public user due to the elevated walkway being undermined by coastal erosion which had occurred underneath the walkway.
We inspected the erosion and our firm opinion was that the landowner had acted entirely correctly, there had been significant coastal erosion and the steel walkway used by the public had been undermined presenting a clear and obvious risk to any member of the public who attempted to use the path.
As a result of the landowners decision to close the path, which had our full support, we sought to implement an alternative route so that the public would still be able to follow the coast path safely. Conveniently there was a perfectly suitable alternate route available for public use. This led the public on the footway adjacent to the public highway along a route which was flat and level, surfaced, lit by street lighting and more or less a similar length as the original route. This was therefore selected as the official diversion route and the South West Coast Path Association informed the public of the closure of the original section and the new alternative route on the official SWCP website and route planning online map.
We also sought to identify funding to attempt repairs to the site however this was fraught with difficulties. The steep bank leading directly onto tidal water, the geology of the site, the access limitations and the impact upon protected tree's as well as many other issues all presented significant constraints. There was also no funding in place to support what was essentially an unfunded capital scheme.
Whilst we had hoped to continue to seek suitable funding streams the situation worsened due to further coastal erosion occurring at the site, with a further significant loss of land in 2024.
Whilst I can fully appreciate that the alternative route in place is not as enjoyable for you as the previous route it is an inescapable fact that our coastline is an ever-changing environment and coastal erosion will continue to interrupt public enjoyment of our beautiful coast line.
As such, whilst we cannot say it will never happen, we are no longer actively looking to secure funding to attempt repairs to this site and the South West Coast Path will be formally re-routed onto the alternate route.
Whilst I understand this is not the outcome you had hoped for I trust this detailed explanation fully answers your queries and provides justification for our actions.
You can now ask the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (the Ombudsman) to review your complaint. You usually have up to 12 months to do this, starting from the date you first knew about the matter you complained about, not from the date of this letter. The Ombudsman will normally only consider complaints made within that time but can decide to look at older complaints if there is a good reason to do so.
The Ombudsman looks at individual complaints about councils, all adult social care providers (including care homes and home care agencies) and some other organisations providing local public services. It investigates matters fairly and impartially and is free to use.
There are some matters the Ombudsman cannot or will not investigate. In these cases it will explain clearly the reason for its decision.
I trust this addresses the matter, however, if you remain unhappy with this outcome you have the right to complain to the Local Government Ombudsman. Please find the contact details below:
Website: www.lgo.org.uk
Telephone: 0300 061 0614
Opening hours: Monday to Friday - 10am to 4pm (except public holidays)
Yours sincerely
Chris Avent
Strategic Programme Manager
Plymouth City Council
Please don’t reply to this email – it’s an automatic message from an unmonitored account.
Reference: CF-Case-716949641
Firstly, please accept my apologies that you have felt it necessary to escalate this complaint and for any inconvenience this matter has continued to cause you.
I have undertaken further investigation into your complaint and confirm my response below: However firstly might we apologise most sincerely for the delay in providing you with a response to your query.
I have looked into how this delay might have occurred so as to provide you with some form of explanation as to why you did not receive a timely response. Having done so it appears that when you first sought to log your query the system, rather than having been allocated to a named officer to was allocated incorrectly to "unauthenticated user". We believe this may have been caused by a typo made our end when logging your complaint allocating your complaint to a former member of staff who's user account has since been deleted and as a result your complaints were trapped in some form of electronic limbo. We are currently in the process of a departmental re-organisation and to hopefully reduce the likelihood of this happening again all teams within Natural Infrastructure and Street Services are checking and updating their contact details and areas of responsibility on the Firmstep system we use to handle feedback, compliments and complaints.
I hope this explanation and the action we have taken goes some way towards reassuring you that we take all feedback, whether positive or negative, seriously and we again apologise for that.
Turning to the substantive issue of your original query you contacted us regarding a section of the South West Coast Path at Turnchapel which was closed in 2019/20. You state this path is a public right of way which Plymouth City Council had closed and diverted onto an alternative route which you felt was inferior. You wanted to know why we did not follow the statutorily prescribed process for the diversion of a public right of way and requested that we re-open the path as a result of our failure to comply with the law.
I can certainly assist you in better understanding our actions relating to the closure of this section of the nationally important South West Coast Path.
All public rights of way are recorded on the Definitive Map and Statement. Together the map and statement form the public record of public rights of way and the inclusion of a path on the Definitive Map is conclusive evidence in law of the existence, route and status of each public public right of way recorded upon it.
You can view a copy of the Definitive Map and Statement online at https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/public-rights-way
As you will see the section of the South West Coast Path you refer to in your complaint is not a way recorded on the Definitive Map.
Whilst the Definitive Map is conclusive evidence in law of the rights shown upon it the reverse is not necessarily true, which is to say that because a way is not shown on the Definitive Map does not mean that public rights do not exist over it and be subject to a current claim or claimed and proven at some point in the future. However, the absence of a route on the Definitive Map does mean that the provisions associated with the diversion or extinguishment of a public right of way under the Highways Act 1980, or the parallel powers contained within the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, do not bite should the path be diverted or extinguished. As such, when the path was closed there was no requirement for any of the provisions of the Public Path Order process and this is why there was no public consultation nor any opportunity for the public to object to its closure.
A reasonable person might well say that despite the paths public status, or lack of, Plymouth City Council knew the path was well used by the public and should have provided at least some advance notice or option for the public to have some say in the matter before the path was closed. This therefore brings us to your second grounds of complaint relating to our closure of the path.
The answer to that query is simple, it was not Plymouth City Council who closed the path. The closure was effected by the private landowner and Plymouth City Council were not given any advance notice of the closure nor were we informed it had been closed until we began receiving complaints from the public about the matter.
Once we became aware of the issue we visited the site and met with the landowner's representative, and the Trails Officer for the South West Coast Path Association (the charity who manage and promote the SWCP). The landowner informed us that they had closed the path as an emergency measure due to the significant risk to the public user due to the elevated walkway being undermined by coastal erosion which had occurred underneath the walkway.
We inspected the erosion and our firm opinion was that the landowner had acted entirely correctly, there had been significant coastal erosion and the steel walkway used by the public had been undermined presenting a clear and obvious risk to any member of the public who attempted to use the path.
As a result of the landowners decision to close the path, which had our full support, we sought to implement an alternative route so that the public would still be able to follow the coast path safely. Conveniently there was a perfectly suitable alternate route available for public use. This led the public on the footway adjacent to the public highway along a route which was flat and level, surfaced, lit by street lighting and more or less a similar length as the original route. This was therefore selected as the official diversion route and the South West Coast Path Association informed the public of the closure of the original section and the new alternative route on the official SWCP website and route planning online map.
We also sought to identify funding to attempt repairs to the site however this was fraught with difficulties. The steep bank leading directly onto tidal water, the geology of the site, the access limitations and the impact upon protected tree's as well as many other issues all presented significant constraints. There was also no funding in place to support what was essentially an unfunded capital scheme.
Whilst we had hoped to continue to seek suitable funding streams the situation worsened due to further coastal erosion occurring at the site, with a further significant loss of land in 2024.
Whilst I can fully appreciate that the alternative route in place is not as enjoyable for you as the previous route it is an inescapable fact that our coastline is an ever-changing environment and coastal erosion will continue to interrupt public enjoyment of our beautiful coast line.
As such, whilst we cannot say it will never happen, we are no longer actively looking to secure funding to attempt repairs to this site and the South West Coast Path will be formally re-routed onto the alternate route.
Whilst I understand this is not the outcome you had hoped for I trust this detailed explanation fully answers your queries and provides justification for our actions.
You can now ask the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (the Ombudsman) to review your complaint. You usually have up to 12 months to do this, starting from the date you first knew about the matter you complained about, not from the date of this letter. The Ombudsman will normally only consider complaints made within that time but can decide to look at older complaints if there is a good reason to do so.
The Ombudsman looks at individual complaints about councils, all adult social care providers (including care homes and home care agencies) and some other organisations providing local public services. It investigates matters fairly and impartially and is free to use.
There are some matters the Ombudsman cannot or will not investigate. In these cases it will explain clearly the reason for its decision.
I trust this addresses the matter, however, if you remain unhappy with this outcome you have the right to complain to the Local Government Ombudsman. Please find the contact details below:
Website: www.lgo.org.uk
Telephone: 0300 061 0614
Opening hours: Monday to Friday - 10am to 4pm (except public holidays)
Yours sincerely
Chris Avent
Strategic Programme Manager
Plymouth City Council
Please don’t reply to this email – it’s an automatic message from an unmonitored account.