Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council charging him to replace an advisory ‘H-Bar’ marking outside his house. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council wants to charge him to replace an advisory H-Bar marking outside his house. The marking was removed following road resurfacing works. Mr X says he has already paid £80 to have the marking installed and should not have to pay again. Mr X says a worker involved in resurfacing the road told him the Council would replace the marking free of charge. Mr X is worried a parked car could block his driveway making it difficult to leave in an emergency.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In its response to Mr X’s complaint the Council has said it is not its policy to replace markings when it resurfaces a road. It says residents are told this when it installs markings. The Council could not find the worker Mr X said the marking would be replaced free of charge. The Council directed Mr X to the Ombudsman.
6. It is not our role to decide what policies councils should operate. We also have no powers to question a council’s decision unless there is fault in the way it was reached.
7. I understand Mr X is frustrated by the Council’s decision. But the Council says it is following its policy which is not to replace markings which are lost during roadworks. Information on the website residents use to apply for an H-Bar marking states:

“Please be aware that Essex Highways will resurface roads as part of their maintenance programme and this may impact any markings you have in place… Prior to making an application you should be aware that these markings are NOT MAINTAINED by the NEPP or Essex County Council and will not be remarked when faded or if carriageway works are undertaken unless you reapply to the Council, the cost of the remarking is £80.00.”

8. So, even if one of the workers did tell Mr X the Council would replace the markings, it is simply now applying its published policy. That would have happened regardless of what Mr X was told. While I know Mr X disagrees with the charge, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman