Traffic management archive 2019-2020


Archive has 132 results

  • Birmingham City Council (19 008 740)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 25-Oct-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint the Council will not install bollards or other devices to prevent neighbours driving across her vehicle crossover to access their own properties. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault with the way the Council has made its decision.

  • Shropshire Council (19 003 194)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 21-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s construction of a traffic safety feature outside his property. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has decided to remove the feature and there is no remaining injustice which would warrant an investigation.

  • Cumbria County Council (19 007 144)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 18-Oct-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not taking action about a parking issue as there is no indication of fault by the Council.

  • Birmingham City Council (19 008 440)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 17-Oct-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council did not directly consult residents in his area about its proposed clean air zone. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council or that we could achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

  • East Sussex County Council (19 001 647)

    Statement Not upheld Traffic management 14-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mr C complains about the County Council’s submissions to the Local Planning Authority as highways consultee for a proposed residential development. Mr C considers the LPA would not have approved the planning application if the Council had provided the correct information and the development will exacerbate the existing parking problems in his road. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council.

  • Hampshire County Council (19 000 854)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 11-Oct-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about past and future Council road traffic schemes. This is because Council traffic schemes affect all or most of the residents in the Council’s area and so the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction.

  • Surrey County Council (19 008 123)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 11-Oct-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with the complainant’s concerns about a cycle event. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault by the Council has caused the complainant injustice that warrants his involvement.

  • London Borough of Hounslow (18 017 881)

    Statement Not upheld Traffic management 07-Oct-2019

    Summary: On the evidence available, there is no evidence of fault by the Council. Officers consulted residents on a traffic scheme, considered the responses and made a decision. The complainant disagrees with the scheme, as it places restrictions outside his business, but there is no evidence of fault leading up to the Councils decision.

  • London Borough of Ealing (17 020 061)

    Statement Upheld Traffic management 03-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about how the Council introduced a controlled parking zone. The Ombudsman has not found fault with how the Council implemented the controlled parking zone but has found fault with its handling of Mr B’s complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B for not making a reasonable adjustment and to provide training to its staff on their duties under the Equality Act 2010.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (19 007 448)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 02-Oct-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the state of the pavement near her home. This is because it is a highway maintenance matter which the courts are better placed to deal with.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings