Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to assess the placing of a warning road sign at a T-junction on his road. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to assess the placing of a warning road sign at a T-junction on his road in 2017 and 2018. Mr X said the issue was first raised by another member of the public in 2016. Mr X also complains the Council has not properly explained why it had not assessed the need for a warning road sign in 2017 and 2018.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke with Mr X and considered the information he provided.
6. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
7. I sent a draft decision to Mr X and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Local Transport Plan (LTP) 2011-2026

8. The Council has a Local Transport Plan which sets out how the Council will develop and maintain a sustainable local transport system and the Council’s strategies for addressing transport issues. The Council uses this policy to determine what priorities should be included in its LTP programme.
9. The LTP programme is a document which sets out the Council’s proposed expenditure for the financial year. It also includes details of the recommended programme of works for the financial year. This programme is developed after consultation with councillors and parish councils.
10. The process for preparing the LTP programme is as follows.

• The Council asks county councillors and parish councils to outline their transport and highways priorities for the next financial year. The Council also sends them details of issues that have been raised (at the time) in their area to consider. The Council sends these out in June each year.
• The Council receives the responses back by September. The Council then considers the suggested priorities against the LTP, other priorities, and the available budget.
• The Council prepares a draft LTP programme for the following financial year; this is done around December – January.
• The Council approves the final LTP programme in March.

What happened

11. There have been several accidents at a T-junction, near to where Mr X lives. In October 2016, a member of the public complained to the Council about the junction and asked it to install safety signs.
12. Mr X said he complained to the Council in June 2018 as the Council had not taken any action to assess whether warning signs were needed.
13. The Council told Mr X during the stage one response that it would look at the location as part of the 2019/20 LTP programme. It said it would consider whether any signage or road marking improvements were necessary. The Council also told Mr X it had no history of any personal injury collisions for that last five years for that location.
14. Mr X was not happy with the Council’s response and asked it to investigate his complaint at stage two.
15. In its stage two complaint response, the Council told Mr X the issue had not been considered a priority for the 2018/19 LTP programme. This was because the local county councillors and parish council had not submitted the issue as a priority for the Council to consider. The Council also said the issues was not raised until the end of 2018 and therefore wasn’t on the list of issues to be considered for 2019/20, but the Council were nevertheless proposing to look at the location.
16. The Council then provided a further response clarifying the issue was circulated to the local councillor and parish council in the summer of 2017 for consideration for the 2018/19 LTP programme. The Council again confirmed the issue was not considered a priority for the 2018/19 LTP programme because it had not been submitted as a top priority by the local councillor and parish council.

Analysis

17. The Council has a clear process in place to decide what the highways and transport priorities will be for the next financial year.
18. The issue of the T-junction was raised in October 2016. The Council’s process sets out that the details of issues are sent to the county councillors and parish councils in June. This meant the T-junction issue could only have been sent to the local county councillor and parish council for their consideration in June 2017.
19. This meant it was not possible for the Council to consider the matter in either 2016 or 2017 because the issue would not have been listed on its LTP programme for the financial years 2016/17 or 2017/18. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council for not assessing the T-junction in 2016 or 2017.
20. The evidence shows the Council sent the issue to the local county councillor and parish council in June 2017. The local county councillor and parish council did not submit the issue as one of their priorities for the 2018/19 LTP programme. Therefore, the Council did not consider whether to include the issue within the 2018/19 LTP programme. The Council was entitled to decide this as it was in line with its procedures. Therefore, I do not find the Council at fault for not assessing the T-junction in 2018.
21. The Council has explained the issue has been included in the 2019/20 LTP programme. The Council said the T-junction would be looked at as part of the rural road safety improvement element of the budget.
22. The Council said it felt it was now appropriate to include the location because Mr X had re-raised the issue and because it had made progress on implementing other priority rural safety schemes in previous years. The Council is entitled to decide this because it is in line with its procedures.
23. Mr X has complained the Council did not properly explain why it had not assessed the need for a warning sign in 2017 and 2018. Based on the evidence, I find the Council’s stage one and two response was not clear in explaining the Council’s rationale for why it would not assess the location. However, the Council provided a further complaint response which did fully explain why the Council did not consider the location in 2016, 2017, and 2018. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I find no fault with the Council’s actions. I have therefore completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman