Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to carry out its duties to prevent traffic disruption caused by an event at a local school. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council in how it reached its decision. However, the Council is at fault for failing to take actions it promised Mr X it would. The Council has agreed to speak with the School at the start of the next academic year about the traffic disruption. .

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to carry out traffic management at an event hosted by a local school in 2019 and 2020.
2. Mr X says that because of his locality to the school this caused him difficulty getting home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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 have considered the information Mr X provided. I have also asked the Council questions and requested information, and in turn have considered the Council’s response.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

7. A school near Mr X’s house ran an event open to one of its year groups in January 2019. Mr X complained to the Council about the lack of traffic management for this event.
8. The Council provided its stage 1 response in February 2019. The Council said the school was responsible for traffic management as it had arranged the event. The Council said it would contact the school and advise that it would be useful to tell the Council about future events.
9. The Council has confirmed to the Ombudsman that it cannot locate any records or documents to confirm it contacted the school in 2019 following Mr X’s complaint.
10. The school arranged the same event in January 2020. Mr X raised a further complaint with the Council about its failure to carry out any traffic management.
11. On 5 February 2020, the Council provided its final stage response. It stated:
• It was the responsibility of the School to tell the Council about any events that it believed would negatively affect the road network.
• The Traffic Management Act 2004 does not require the Council to act when it considers that an event would only have an insignificant impact. Since the event only happens once per year the Council considered this an insignificant impact.
• The Traffic Management Act 2004 does not give powers to the Council to apply a penalty to the school if it is acting within its usual operation as per its planning consent. The Council considered that hosting this event was within its usual operation as a school.
• It had received no other complaints about the traffic relating to this event and had not received contact from the Police.
• The Council promised to speak with the academy and remind it of the localised impact of these events and see if it could minimise the impact.
12. The Council’s response to our enquiries highlighted further consideration the Council took when reaching its decision. It said:
• There were alternative routes of a similar distance that Mr X could take when travelling home.
• The event at the school is for one-year group during the early evening. This is less than the full student body and staff who would travel to the school at the start and end of each day.
• The Council does not accept that the event presented a significant impact but would speak with the school to see if improvements could be made.

Analysis

13. Following Mr X’s complaint about traffic disruption in 2019, the Council said it would discuss traffic management with the Academy before the next event in 2020. The Council did not do that. The failure to speak with the Academy as promised was fault. The Council has promised to speak to the school at the start of the next academic year; this remedy’s any injustice caused.
14. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision not to carry out traffic management for the school event in 2020 following his 2019 complaint. The Ombudsman cannot criticise a council decision which is properly made or intervene to substitute an alternative view. The Council has demonstrated it considered the relevant legislation and decided that it did not need to take traffic management action at this event as the impact on the roads would not be significant. I do not find fault with how the Council made that decision.
15. In addition, as the event only happens once a year, the disruption caused to Mr X is minimal, therefore there is no evidence Mr X has been caused a significant injustice.

Agreed action

16. Within one month of my final decision, the Council will:
• Speak with the Academy to see if improvements can be made to the traffic management at future events.

Back to top

Final decision

17. There was fault by the Council as the Council has agreed to my recommendation I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman