Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not deal properly with a road closure affecting him. The Council did not provide details of the road closure to the emergency services properly. Mr X was placed at risk of harm for several weeks. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council the Council did not deal with a road closure properly because it did not properly advise the emergency services of the closure and did not deal with his complaint properly.
2. Mr X says he and his family were exposed to risk if there had been an emergency.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
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 to Mr X and considered the details of his complaint as well as the Council’s response. I reviewed documents sent by the Council and Mr X.
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

What happened

7. The Council decided to close a road and implemented a diversion route. The Council sent emails advising the emergency services of the closure and diversion.
8. The road closure took effect in June 2020. It became apparent that some of the emergency services were not aware of the road closure and diversion.
9. A site meeting was held in July 2020 several weeks after the closure was implemented and alternative arrangements were put in place.

Analysis

10. The Council agrees that emails sent to the Ambulance service were not sent to the correct email address. This was fault by the Council.
11. Email information from the Council shows the email address it used to send information about the road closure and diversion to the Police was correct.
12. Email information from the Council shows the email address it used to send information about the road closure and diversion to the Fire and Rescue Service was wrong. This was fault by the Council.
13. I have seen correspondence that shows the Fire and Rescue Service stated that its response time using the Council’s proposed diversion would involve a delay of approximately 6 minutes. The Fire and Rescue Service’s Integrated Risk Management Plan objectives include "aiming to attend life threatening incidents in an average of 10 minutes. On the balance of probabilities, an additional 6 minute delay would make it much more difficult for the Fire and Rescue Service to meet that target in respect of Mr X’s home. Mr X was placed at risk of harm because emergency responses would have been delayed.
14. I have seen emails showing that suitable access arrangements were put in place.
15. The Council has checked with the emergency services and all future information about road closures and diversions are now being sent to the correct recipients.

Back to top

Agreed action

16. To remedy the injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within four weeks of this decision.
• Apologise to Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

17. I have found fault causing injustice to Mr X. I have now completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman