Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council authorising a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order. There is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs X was unhappy with the Council’s decision to authorise a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order (TTRO). Mrs X was also unhappy with the Council’s arrangements for traffic diversion, and she said this would have serious implications for local people.

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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X complained to the Council because it authorised a TTRO in her local area. In her complaint to us, she expressed concern this would affect emergency services; local businesses and the diversion route was substandard. She also said the Council had not properly consulted.
6. The Council responded to Mrs X and said it had taken steps to adjust some of the work to minimise the impact of the TTRO. It also said it published the order in local newspapers and consulted with emergency services and other local services. Given the Council’s explanation here, I cannot see there is evidence of fault to justify carrying out an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman