Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about roadworks. This is mainly because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Dr B complains the Council poorly planned the timing of roadworks with temporary traffic lights, which he says caused delays to his journeys. Dr B is also unhappy with the Council’s response to his complaint, which he says ignored his question about how the roadworks were planned.

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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaints procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered a serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
7. Dr B says his injustice is delay to his journeys caused by roadworks. While Dr B clearly feels strongly about the roadworks, he has not suffered serious loss, harm or distress because of the problem he has complained about. While the roadworks may have caused some inconvenience and frustration to Dr B, the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
8. As we are not investigating the substantive matter, it would not be a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council responded to Dr B’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Dr B’s complaint. Any injustice from the roadworks is not significant enough to justify our involvement. It would be disproportionate to investigate the complaint-handling in isolation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman