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 is failing to maintain the highway as they are not sweeping streets or clearing gullies. Mr Y says he feels he lives in an area which looks rundown, despite paying substantial levels of council tax.

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 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))
3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council as a local highways authority has a statutory duty to reasonably maintain and repair the highway so it is free of danger to all users using the highway in a way normally to be expected. This means the Council is expected to routinely monitor the state of highways, depending on their classification and carry out repairs where necessary. But, the level of maintenance, frequency of inspection, and threshold for repair is not set out in law and is open to interpretation.
6. Mr Y has complained about the lack of street sweeping and clearing of gullies as part of the road maintenance in his area. However, the Council has explained in its complaint response how it intends to maintain the highway in this way, depending on the need, particularly for flooding in relation to the clearance of drainage gullies. It also has a reactive service for when maintenance is needed, prioritised on risk and need. The Council uses its professional expertise to determine the level of risk and need for highway maintenance.
7. Mr Y strongly feels the service is insufficient. However, we are unlikely to find fault with the Council’s approach as it is entitled to make a judgement on where to prioritise its resources based on its professional assessment. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify use of public resources to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

8. 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