Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has failed to sufficiently maintain the highway surface, leading to cracks and an uneven surface.
2. Mr Y says he is concerned about his property shaking as a result of the poor surface and feels anxious.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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.
7. In this case the council has made a site visit, considered the issues and decided as the area’s Highways Authority that while it would like to complete works, this is not sufficiently urgent to warrant the work being completed straight away. It has instead said it would want to complete the resurfacing work Mr Y is seeking when it has sufficient funds to be able to do so.
8. While Mr Y may disagree with the approach, we are unlikely to find fault as the council is entitled to make a judgement on where to prioritise its resources based on its professional assessment and opinion. In this case the Council has considered the matter and decided on its course of action and timescale for this using relevant criteria such as need, risk and the level of noise.
9. As the Council has considered relevant factors in its decision-making process, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman