Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the poor surface conditions of a road near to his property is causing damage to his property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

3. Mr X complains that the poor surface conditions of a road near to his property is causing damage to his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complains the poor condition of a road near to his property is causing damage to his property. He says the vibrations caused by the traffic using the road is causing the doors and walls to visibly shake, and that cracks have started to appear on his property.
8. The Council said it had inspected the road and found no actionable defects. The Council also said there was no evidence that ground borne vibrations were a source of significant damage to buildings and that cracking in plaster would be indistinguishable from cracking due to other causes such as shrinkage, subsidence, or poor maintenance.
9. The Council also said that human sensitivity is such that very low levels of vibrations can be detected, around 0.14mm/s to 0.3mm/s and it is accepted that vibrations above this level can disturb, startle and cause annoyance. The Council added that for a 5% chance of structural damage occurring, vibration levels would need to exceed 12.5mm/s.
10. The Council confirmed it was not responsible for recording measurements and explained it was open to Mr X to commission a private consultant or building surveyor to take these measurements and to demonstrate the vibration levels exceeded the thresholds.
11. An investigation is not justified as we are not likely to find fault. This is because the Council has appropriately inspected the road and satisfied itself there is no defects that require repairing. The Council has also explained it is not responsible for measuring the vibration levels and that it is open to Mr X to commission a consultant to take these measurements.
12. I acknowledge Mr X is reluctant to commission a consultant until he receives reassurance from the Council that if the report indicated vibration levels above the threshold, that this would lead to the resurfacing of the road near to his property. However, we are not likely to find fault with the Council for declining to comment until it has sight of the report. This is because the Council cannot make an informed decision until it can review the findings of the report. Therefore, it would not be good practice for the Council to commit to any future action prior to consideration of all relevant evidence.
13. It remains open to Mr X to commission a building surveyor to obtain the evidence to support his claim the damaged road surface is causing damage to his property.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman