Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s closure of a road which affected Mrs X’s business parking. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council closing a road without adequate notification to her. She says access to the parking if front of her building was blocked and this caused inconvenience for her customers.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X says her business was affected by a road closure which prevented her customers from parking on land in front of her premises and which meant they had to park further away causing inconvenience. She says one customer received a parking penalty for parking in a restricted area nearby.
6. Mrs X complained to the Council because she says she was not notified about the scheme and diversion signs about the works were not close to her premises. The Council told her that the scheme had been advertised in local press articles and that the details of the temporary traffic order introducing the works were referred to in the article and were still available on the site.
7. There is no requirement in the legislation to individually notify residents of traffic orders and it is for the highway authority to consider how much additional publicity it should provide. The Council advised Mrs X that her customer could challenge the parking penalty by way of an appeal but she must do this in person.
8. We may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members. Instead, we focus on the process by which the decision was made. In this case the Council met the requirements for publicising the temporary traffic order.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s closure of a road which affected Mrs X’s business parking. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman