Shropshire Council (19 012 658)
Category : Transport and highways > Highway repair and maintenance
Decision : Not upheld
Decision date : 20 Oct 2020
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: Mr X complains that the Council will not take action about a new road surface that has been laid outside his home. He says the increased noise levels and vibrations affect his family. The Ombudsman does not find the Council at fault.
The complaint
- The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council will not take action about a new road surface that has been laid outside his home. Mr X says the new road surface has increased noise levels and vibrations from passing vehicles. He says this has affected his children’s sleep and consequently their schoolwork. He also says his new acoustic glass double-glazing is not effective, given the increased noise, and the vibrations cause pictures to fall off the walls.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered the information and documents provided by Mr X and the Council. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement. I considered all comments received before I reached a final decision.
What I found
What should have happened
- Section 41 of the Highways Act 1980 places a duty on highway authorities to maintain public highways. Highway authorities are expected to routinely monitor the state of highways for which they are responsible and to carry out repairs where necessary.
- Councils, as highways authorities, use certain guidance when deciding what ‘surface dressing’ to use when maintaining road surfaces. This guidance includes ‘the Design Guide for Road Surfacing: Road Note 39’ (published by TRL), ‘the Manual for Highway Works’, and ‘the Guidance Document for Surface Dressing’ (published by the Road Surface Treatments Association).
- There are no statutes or regulations prescribing the standards to which highway authorities should maintain highways. The courts have said the highway authority’s duty “is reasonably to maintain and repair the highway so that it is free of danger to all users who use that highway in the way normally to be expected of them”.
What happened
- In June 2019, the Council laid a new surface on the main road outside Mr X’s home.
- Mr X complained to the Council that the new road surface had increased noise and vibration in his home significantly. He said the noise was affecting his family.
- The Council responded by saying the road surfaces met the required standards and specifications for the road. It said the road may become quieter over time. The Council said it did not plan to take any remedial action about the material used to surface the road.
Analysis
- I find that the Council has used a road surfacing material that is in accordance with the guidance referred to above. For this reason, I do not find the Council at fault.
- The courts have said that the duty of a highway authority “is reasonably to maintain and repair the highway so that it is free of danger to all users who use that highway in the way normally to be expected of them”. I find that the Council has done this.
Final decision
- I have completed my investigation and I do not uphold Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman