Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to re-open a nearby road which was closed by a banking collapse in 2019. He says the current diversion is inconvenient and difficult for visitors to identify. We will 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 the Council failing to carry out work to re-open a rural road which he uses to access his home. The road has been closed since August 2019 and the Council has extended temporary traffic regulation orders since then but has not started rebuilding work. He says the diversion is inconvenient and he damaged his car when manoeuvring through a narrow access. He wants the Council to carry out the works as soon as possible and re-open the road.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

4. The road which Mr X uses to access his home was blocked by a banking collapse in 2019. The Council closed the road to traffic using a temporary traffic regulation order. When no progress to re-open the road in early 2020 Mr X raised the matter with the Council. It told him it would not be able to start the works until after the unsuitable winter weather and it was negotiating with landowners to secure the best way to repair the site. It told him specialist contractors would be required for the works.
5. In March Mr X contacted the Council again. It told him that due to the government lockdown in the COVID-19 pandemic it had deployed its resources elsewhere and that no repair works similar to the road in question would be undertaken for the time being.
6. Mr X made further complaints in 2021 when the work remained unstarted. The Council says it tendered for the work in 2020 and the contract has been awarded to a specialist engineer whom it hopes can start the work in the coming weeks.
7. Analysis
8. The Council created a temporary traffic regulation order to formally close the road when it had been made impassable by a collapse. The order is to formally prevent traffic from using a route which is unsafe. There is no requirement in the order for works to be carried out.
9. The Council has explained its reasons to Mr X why the work had not been carried out up to his complaint. It has undertaken preparation works in 2020 but diverted its resources to other needs during the pandemic. The Council is the highway authority and it must decide where to deploy its resources.
10. Whilst Mr X may have been inconvenienced by the road closure and diversion there is no legal right to compensation for the closure of a highway and any losses which it may cause to residents or businesses.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will 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