Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (25 020 448)

Category : Transport and highways > Highway repair and maintenance

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 26 Apr 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the resurfacing work carried out on his road. The courts are better placed to consider the matter.

The complaint

  1. Mr X is unhappy with the road repairs carried out by the Council on his road. He complains the work is substandard. He says the Council had told him they would be coming back to resurface the road, but they have not done so.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The Act 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

  1. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X is unhappy with the road repairs carried out by the Council on his road. He complains the Council have not come back to redo the work when he was told they would.
  2. The Councils advised Mr X his road wasn’t due to be resurfaced and apologised for any misunderstanding. The Council outlined how it determined which roads were being resurfaced or repaired, and that this was done on a priority basis. It stated that Mr X’s road was not in the current investment programme to be resurfaced, but that it would be considered for resurfacing in the future.
  3. If a person considers that a highways authority has failed to maintain a highway it is reasonable for the person affected to apply to 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.
  4. Mr X may use this process to try to get the Council to repair the road. I find it is reasonable for Mr X to do this.
  5. The court is in the best position to decide whether the Council has met its legal duty to maintain the highway. Also, unlike the Ombudsman, the court can order the Council to do the required work.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the court is better placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings