Summary: Mr B says the Council failed to grit the whole village, failed to replace missing grit bins and failed to resolve issues with various signs in the village. There is no fault in the Council’s decision-making in relation to the extent of gritting in the village and no fault in refusing to replace grit bins. There was confusion in the Council’s communications with Mr B about new grit bins and it failed to keep him up-to-date with what was happening with signs in the village. An apology, consideration of the outstanding matters and communication with Mr B about the Council’s decision is satisfactory remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr B, complained the Council:
• failed to repair roads in the village to an acceptable standard;
• failed to engage with him to discuss his concerns about the suitability of the road surface;
• failed to grit the whole village despite the Council’s maps showing the northern end of the village is also part of the priority 2 route;
• failed to replace missing grit bins; and
• failed to take action to resolve issues with various signs in the village.
2. Mr B says failures by the Council means he has been left without a gritting service which causes anxiety during winter.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated Mr B’s concerns about gritting issues and problems with signs in the village. The final section of this statement contains my reason for not investigating the rest of the complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. The Ombudsman cannot question whether a Council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. He must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended and 34(3))
6. If we are satisfied with a Council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Mr B's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
8. Mr B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

9. At a meeting in 2014 the Council considered a report on the winter highways service. As a result of that meeting the Council agreed to pre-treat priority 1 and 2 routes as the Council aims to keep those routes open and usable as a priority over other parts of the network. P3 routes are to be treated when the forecast indicates a period of prolonged poor weather. The remaining highways were classed as priority 4 which are treated over a longer period of time. As part of that decision the Council decided to remove all grit bins from priority 1 and 2 routes.
10. The Council’s service procedure for the provision of grit heaps and grit bins (the procedure) says the purpose of providing grit bins is to supplement the service provided by the highway authority to enable the public to use the salt/grit mixture to treat local problems on the carriageway or footway. It says grit heaps and grit bins are not normally provided on priority 1 and priority 2 pre-salting routes.
11. The procedure says frequent requests for grit heaps and grit bins are received each year from the general public, parish councils and police. The procedure says the decision as to whether to provide a grit heap or bin should be based on the following considerations:
• is there a genuine need for a heap or bin? Collision history, local knowledge and a visual inspection will play a part in this;
• should a grit heap or a grit bin be used? Local knowledge and a site inspection will provide the answer;
• is the bin on a priority 1 or 2 route?
• is it being funded by the parish Council or another third party?

What happened

12. In 2014 the Council considered and approved a report for the winter highways service. In essence this resulted in an agreement for the Council to carry out gritting on priority 1 and 2 roads when the forecast was for frost, ice or snow. At the same time the Council introduced a service procedure for the provision of grit bins. As part of that procedure grit bins on priority 1 or 2 gritting routes were no longer required.
13. Mr B raised concerns about the lack of gritting in his village and missing grit bins. The Council wrote to Mr B in January 2021 to explain its policy. The Council explained it no longer provided grit bins on priority gritting routes and explained the bins Mr B had identified were no longer required as they were on priority 2 gritting routes.
14. Following further correspondence from Mr B in February 2021 the Council told him if he or the parish council provided a map detailing locations where grit bins would be helpful to the village the Council would review those requests. The Council provided Mr B with a copy of the maps it was working off.
15. As there were concerns about the clarity of the maps the Council wrote to Mr B again in March 2021 to demonstrate the extent of the priority 2 gritting route. The Council explained the route did not extend as far as Mr B believed it did. The Council explained the northern end of Mr B’s village fell within the priority 3 route. The Council told Mr B it would arrange for a new bin to be placed by the village green by next winter. The Council also explained that if Mr B wanted further grit bins he would need to liaise with the parish council to provide a map of where residents wanted the bins to be placed and the Council would review that request.
16. A Council officer met with Mr B in May 2021 to discuss his concerns about various highways issues. That included problems with signs in Mr B’s village.
17. The Council wrote to Mr B in June 2021 to explain the action it had taken on the 20 issues he had raised at the meeting. In that letter the Council referred to Mr B’s request for grit bins at three new locations in the village and explained its view that following an assessment of the locations requested they did not meet the requirement for a salt bin.
18. In November 2021 Mr B presented a petition to the Council’s cabinet which included a request for grit bins in three locations in his village. The Council wrote to Mr B after that meeting to tell him it would assess the three locations he had identified as suitable for a new grit bin.

Analysis

19. Mr B says the Council should be gritting the whole village rather than only the southern part of his village because the Council’s maps show both ends of the village are part of the priority 2 route. As I said in paragraph 8, the Council’s policy is to only grit those roads which fall within priority 1 or 2 routes when frost, ice or snow are forecast. The issue is therefore whether the northern end of the village is part of the priority 2 route. Mr B believes it is. However, the Council has provided a list of the priority routes for Mr B’s village as well as a map of the area. That list and the maps provided by the Council show the priority 2 route, and therefore the gritting, does not go as far as the northern end of the village and Mr B’s property. I am therefore satisfied the Council is following its policy by not gritting as far as Mr B’s property. I therefore have no grounds to criticise the Council.
20. I appreciate Mr B says there are times when the gritters have gritted the whole village. Mr B says because circumstances have not changed and the maps remain the same the Council should be gritting his village all the time. The evidence I have seen though satisfies me the Council agreed in 2014 to only grit priority 1 and 2 routes when frost, ice or snow was forecast. As I said in the previous paragraph, the maps provided by the Council show the northern end of the village was not included in either priority 1 or priority 2. I understand though that some additional gritting may have taken place during works to the highway when a diversion was in place. That this took place in those circumstances though does not mean the Council has a responsibility to grit the whole village. As I have advised, I am satisfied the maps do not show the northern end of the village and Mr B’s road as included in the priority 2 route. I therefore cannot criticise the Council for not gritting that area.
21. Mr B is also concerned about the removal of grit bins. Mr B raised concerns about three specific bins removed by the Council. I cover in paragraph 9 the Council’s policy on provision of grit bins. That policy makes clear grit bins will be removed and not replaced on priority 1 or 2 gritting routes. I am satisfied the Council has explained to Mr B the three bins he is concerned about were on priority 2 routes. In those circumstances I cannot criticise the Council for removing the bins and not replacing them given that is in accordance with its policy. If Mr B believes the Council’s policy should be changed he will need to contact his local Councillor about that.
22. There is, however, an issue with the grit bins Mr B has asked for close to his property. That is not on a priority 1 or 2 route. I set out in paragraph 10 what the Council’s service procedure says in terms of provision of new bins. That makes clear the request for a new grit bin is a reactive service. In other words, it is not one where the Council will travel around its area to identify places where grit bins are required. Instead, the Council will respond to requests from individuals and the parish council for new grit bins. The Council says the reason it has not progressed the request for additional grit bins from Mr B is because he has not provided details of the locations where those bins are required, which would allow the Council to carry out an assessment. I do not consider that is accurate. In its letter of 25 November 2021, following a petition Mr B presented to the Council’s Cabinet, the Council noted Mr B had provided details of three new locations he considered appropriate for grit bins. The Council told Mr B in that letter it would pass those requests to it highways team to assess against its policy.
23. It is clear though that at least two of those three requests relate to locations the Council had already said in June 2021 it had assessed as not meeting the requirement for a grit bin. It seems to me that because different officers have dealt with Mr B’s concerns at different times there has been an issue with failing to pick up on earlier action that had been taken. Given the Council had committed to carry out an assessment of the locations requested by Mr B in November 2021 though he had a reasonable expectation that a further assessment would take place. Failing to do that is fault, as is failing to write to Mr B to explain what was happening. I recommended the Council apologise to Mr B and arrange for an assessment of the locations where Mr B has asked for a grit bin and then communicate the outcome of its assessment to Mr B. I also recommended the Council ensure that when a department other than highways responds to Mr B’s highways concerns in future that department check previous correspondence from the highways department to ensure that the Council’s explanations are consistent. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.
24. The final concern Mr B has relates to issues with various signs in his area. I am satisfied the Council communicated with Mr B about those signs in June 2021. I am concerned to note though that for a number of those signs action has still not been taken. The Council has provided no explanation for that, although I appreciate there is likely to be a prioritisation process in place. From Mr B’s point of view though without any further information about what has happened to his request he is left believing the Council is not dealing with it. That is fault. The Council has provided information to the Ombudsman about what is happening with the outstanding requests. In some cases though it is not clear what is happening with the request. That again is fault. I recommended within two months of my decision the Council consider the outstanding requests in relation to the road signs Mr B has identified and make a decision about what to do with those issues. The Council should then communicate its decision to Mr B. I also recommended the Council apologise to Mr B for the delay and for not keeping him up-to-date. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.

Back to top

Agreed action

25. Within one month of my decision the Council should apologise to Mr B for failing to follow up on what it agreed to do in relation to the grit bins and to tell him its decisions in relation to the signage issues he had raised.
26. Within two months of my decision the Council should:
• assess the three locations Mr B has identified for grit bins and make a decision about whether a grit bin is appropriate in those locations. Following that the Council should write to Mr B to tell him its decision;
• make a decision on the outstanding signage issues and write to Mr B to tell him the outcome;
• in future when dealing with correspondence from Mr B the Council should make sure where other departments respond to Mr B’s concerns relating to highway matters a check is made with highways to see if the matter has already been addressed.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have completed my investigation and found fault by the Council in part of the complaint. I am satisfied the action the Council will take is sufficient to remedy Mr B’s injustice as a result of that fault.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

28. I have not investigated Mr B’s concern about the failure to repair the village road to an acceptable standard. That is because under section 56 of the Highways Act 1980 Mr B has a right of appeal to a Magistrates Court to request an order to require the Council to take action to bring the road up to standard. That means this part of the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. I have not exercised the Ombudsman’s discretion to investigate this part of the complaint as the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking, which is for the Council to take action to improve the road surface. That can only be achieved through the Magistrates Court.
29. Nor have I investigated Mr B’s concerns about the difficulty communicating with the Council about the standard of repair to the village road. That is because the Ombudsman will not normally consider a complaint about communication issues where those communication issues relate to a substantive issue which is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and where we are not exercising our discretion, as is the case here.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman