Council has no case to answer in naming row

A complaint made against Shropshire Council by a resident who was refused permission to change the name of his home has been thrown out.

The man, known only as Mr B, complained to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman after the authority said his proposed name was too similar to nearby properties.

Mr B then complained to the ombudsman about the decision, who have now refused to investigate the complaint.

They said they found Shropshire Council had acted correctly.

In its ruling, the ombudsman said: “Mr B complains about the way the council handled his request for his property to be known by another name.

“The ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

“Mr B contacted the council to ask that he be allowed to revert back and call his property by the name it used to be known and by the name recorded on his title deeds and by the Land Registry.

“The council turned down this request because another property in close vicinity was already using the same name and an alternative name was proposed.

“Although the council contacted Royal Mail with details of the alternative proposed name change, and the company initially changed its records to record this new name, the change was reversed because the council decided the name was too similar to another nearby property and it had not formally agreed to the change.

“The council told Mr B it would not accept a name change that duplicated existing addresses in the area or were too similar but offered to consider alternative names and waive the normal fee charged for changing a property name as a gesture of good will.

“The council had initially suggested a local parish meeting take place to see if there were any views on the proposed name change.

“However, following concerns expressed by Mr B about this, the council says it contacted the parish clerk to advise that Mr B did not want the matter considered by the parish meeting and that the council did not want it to further consider the matter either.

“Nevertheless, the matter was raised again at a later parish meeting.

“It is the role of the council to issue official addresses to properties within its area and its policy means that it will not authorise a name which is a duplication or too close to an existing address.

“Mr B says there are already a number of similarly named properties in the wider area and wants to be allowed to change the name of his property to one of his choice.

“However, it is for the council to decide what is and is not acceptable and we cannot review the merits of its decision.

“While I note there was confusion caused by a lack of clarity by the council when it initially contacted Royal Mail with the intention of consulting it about the proposed name change, the council has apologised for its error and subsequently asked Royal Mail to reverse the change the company had implemented.

“While noting there remains a dispute between Mr B and the council about the council’s involvement in arranging the parish meeting, the council’s offer to undertake a name change free of charge is a reasonable way of resolving the complaint and I see no outstanding grounds which warrant investigation by the ombudsman.”