Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s consultation and decisions on changes to the public highway. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council or that we could say its actions caused Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about changes to the highway which have resulted in restricted access to and from his property by car. He says the Council did not properly consider the impact of the changes and failed to properly consult on them.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. As part of changes proposed to the public highway in 2019 the Council consulted local residents and invited their views.
5. Mr X responded to the consultation but while the consultation document referred to the need to move a bus stop it did not say where the bus stop would be moved to. The bus stop has now been repositioned on the road outside Mr X’s property and Mr X is not happy with this. He says the Council failed to properly consider the impact of moving the bus stop and complains bus drivers now block the entrance to his driveway. He says bus drivers have on occasion left buses parked on the road while they take their breaks.
6. There is no requirement for the Council to consult residents on any proposal to relocate a bus stop and we could not therefore say the Council’s failure to specify the new location and to invite comments was fault. It is also relevant that even if Mr X had known about the plan and objected to it, the Council was under no obligation to change the location so it is unlikely we could say the outcome would or should have been different.
7. In normal circumstances any inconvenience caused by buses stopping on the road outside Mr X’s property to pick up or drop off passengers is also short-lived and would not be significant enough to warrant investigation.
8. While Mr X complains about bus drivers taking breaks while blocking his driveway this does not appear to be common and the Council has invited Mr X to contact its Transport and Parking Service to report the issue if it persists. It also confirms it has raised the issue with the local bus operators who use the stop.
9. Mr X complains generally about a loss of on-street parking as a result of the changes brought in by the Council but there is nothing to show this issue affects him personally; his concern is more about the impact on others. There is also no suggestion the Council’s consultation on these proposals was affected by fault. Mr X acknowledges the consultation document clearly set out the other changes proposed and while the Council sought the views of residents it was under no absolute requirement to follow them. Matters of road safety and the positioning of bus stops are ultimately for the Council to decide as the local highway authority and we could not say it must move the back stop back to its original position.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council affecting its decisions. The matter also does not cause Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman