Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about highway maintenance. This is because the courts are better placed to consider the matter.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to maintain a busy highway junction. He says the Council has failed to adequately sweep and maintain the junction’s roundabouts, gutters and gullies over several years, which has caused vegetation and debris to build up. During times of heavy rainfall, Mr X complains the highway has high levels of standing water leading to poor visibility and poses a high health and safety risk to highway users. 
2. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his requests for it to act and its failure to respond to his complaints.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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))
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Following Mr X’s complaint, the Council scheduled works in December 2025 to cleanse the stretch of road. In its complaint response, the Council explained, due to unexpected staff shortages, it could not go ahead with the scheduled works. It said it aimed to complete the works in January 2026 instead, but this was dependent on the weather and several other factors. It said it also needed to restart the process of getting the necessary permissions from National Highways before carrying out the works. The Council said this was because the road belonged to National Highways. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating. The Council uses its professional expertise to determine the level of risk and need for highway maintenance. After the original works could not safely go ahead, the Council explained to Mr X the steps it would take to reschedule these. So, we will not investigate.
9. In any case, if a person considers a highways authority has failed to maintain a highway it is responsible for, the person affected can apply to the magistrates court for an order to be made under section 56 of the Highways Act 1980. This order requires the highways authority to carry out the work needed to the highway, including the clearing of drains running underneath the road to prevent flooding. The courts also have powers under Section 150 of the Act to order the Council to remove obstructions including “soil etc.” which may directly deal with the cause of the issues Mr X describes.
10. If the highways authority does not respond in time or does not accept it is responsible for maintaining the road, the person may apply to the crown court for such an order.
11. It is open to Mr X to use this process to try to get the Council to complete the works. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to pursue this if he remains unhappy.
12. We do not investigate councils’ communications and complaint handling alone where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to do so. That limitation applies here so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about highway maintenance. This is because the courts are better placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman