Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to resolve his complaints about traffic noise and vibration from a potholed road surface and defective street lighting in his area. We should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about traffic noise and vibration to his home caused by a pothole in the highway. He says it should repair the road with some urgency. He also complained about defective street lighting in his area which has not been repaired for some time.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s responses. Mr X has been given an opportunity to comment on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X says a large pothole in the highway causes traffic noise and vibration to his home when HGV’s pass over it. Traffic has increased in recent years and he wants the Council to resurface the road to prevent the disturbance.
6. The Council told Mr X that the road currently does not meet its criteria for intervention for repairs. It says it will consider the road in its 2021/22 season for ‘structural patching’ but cannot justify immediate works.
7. Mr X told the Council he may consider taking legal action for negligence if his property is found to be damaged by the vibration. The Council provided him with details of its insurers should he decide to submit a claim. The Ombudsman cannot resolve claims for negligence because they relate to legal torts which can only be determined by the courts where insurers do not accept liability.
8. The Council says there is a problem with street lighting in one area which requires a re-cabling of the lamps. The matter is currently with the electricity utility company who must source an alternative supply.
9. The Ombudsman may not question the merits of decisions which have been made in a proper manner. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions. In this case the Council has explained what actions it may take and how Mr X could submit a claim for any damages.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman