Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs Y wants, and there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complained the Council has failed to repair a road which collapsed in her area, she believes collapsed due to HGVs using it to access a building site. She is unhappy with the several routes being used in her village as a diversion as she believes this is causing damage to footpaths and other issues as the roads are not wide enough for HGVs to pass each other.
2. She says this has led to isolation in her village in part due to a lack of public transport and the closure of the local shop and is causing significant inconvenience for her and other villagers.

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:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs Y has told us she is seeking a free bus pass or taxi pass to help people in her village to the main town, approximately four miles away. She also is seeking compensation for various drivers in the village who have had car wing mirrors or tyres punctured, repairs to the highway’s passing places and to stop HGVs from using certain roads in her village by law. She has also asked for the Council to consider reducing the villagers’ council tax.
6. We do not have the power to recommend and therefore cannot achieve the outcomes Mrs Y has requested and for some of her desired outcomes other body’s can better consider the issues. For example, we cannot stop HGVs from using certain roads in her village by law or recommend this Council reduces council tax for this group of villagers. This is particularly as reduction of council tax would be an action for the local district council, rather than the county council to consider in this case. Consequently, as we cannot achieve the outcomes Mrs Y is seeking, we will not investigate.
7. Further, we also cannot award compensation for damage to vehicles. The legislation from which the Ombudsman takes their power also places some restrictions on what we may investigate. One of these concerns negligence claims about damage to property or personal injury. We cannot determine liability claims for negligence.
8. These are legal claims which may only be determined by insurers or the courts. Consequently, any claim for damages, such as costs for repairs to vehicles, which Mrs Y considers the Council to be responsible for, are matters more appropriately dealt with by the courts. It is therefore reasonable for Mrs Y to pursue her claim through either her insurer or the courts. We will not investigate this complaint.
9. Mrs Y can also seek an order from the Magistrates court if she believes the Council has failed to maintain the highway in her area under section 56 of the Highways Act. This would apply both for the original collapse of the road which the Council has sought to repair and the passing places she says have been damaged by HGVs. As such an order can require specific work to be completed by the Council, and the court can decide whether the Council has met its duty as a Highways Authority where we cannot, it is better placed to consider the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because we cannot achieve the outcome she wants, and there is another body better placed to consider parts of her complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman