Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to replace traffic bollards at the end of his street which he says are decayed. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complained about the Council refusing to replace bollards at the end of his street. He says that they are in a rotten condition and if they broke they would present a hazard to pedestrians.

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’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response. Mr X has commented on a copy of my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X says the bollards at the end of his street which separate it from another road are in a poor condition. The Council has replaced some of them, but others are decayed and one has been removed. He is concerned that they may present a hazard to pedestrians if they deteriorate further. He also says he is concerned that drivers may try to drive over the grassed area and footway if the bollards are removed.
5. The Council inspected the site and informed Mr X that it considers the bollards do not need replacing at present. It has a programmed maintenance schedule for highways in its area and says there is no reason to carry out unscheduled repairs.
6. The Council is the highway authority and it is responsible for deciding when traffic safety features are replaced or renewed. There is no direct injustice caused to Mr X at present from the bollards and so we will not pursue the matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman