Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highways because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained about the Council’s failure to resolve an issue in a tunnel he uses while driving his car. He is also unhappy with the response he received from the Council to his complaint.
2. Mr Y says this has led to him consistently being stuck in traffic due to the ongoing works.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr Y is unhappy at the Council’s failure to resolve an issue with fans in a tunnel in his area, leading to roadworks in the tunnel which he says is causing traffic problems. In its response the Council explained why the work was necessary and why it has continued to make other repairs as a matter of urgency for the public’s safety while using the tunnel. Mr Y is unhappy that the Council’s response has not provided him with useful answers to his queries as part of his complaint.
7. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered a serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss of injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
8. While Mr Y may feel strongly about the issue, his alleged injustice is not a sufficiently serious loss, harm or distress which would justify our investigation. Consequently, we will not investigate.
9. As we are not investigating the substantive issue it is not a good use of public funds to investigate how the Council dealt with Mr Y’s complaint and we will therefore not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman