Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the decision to place a bus stop outside the complainant’s house. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the decision to place a bus stop outside his house. Mr X says the Council should have given him the opportunity to install a vehicle crossover. This would have meant the bus stop would have been installed in a different location. Mr X wants the bus stop moved.

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)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In its response to Mr X the Council has explained the process followed to decide where the bus stop should be placed. It explained the Council had powers to place a bus stop without approval from nearby households. It set out the consultation carried out and why the bus stop had been installed outside Mr X’s house. It said why the other options were not considered viable. It explained that while Mr X had hardstanding to the front of his property, there was not a vehicle crossover, or an application for one. It was therefore entitled to consider a location outside Mr X’s house.
6. I understand Mr X is disappointed with the Council’s decision. But the role of the Ombudsman is to look for administrative fault. It is not our role to question a council’s decision if there was no fault or flaw in the way the decision was reached.
7. The Council has responded to Mr X and provided what I consider to be proportionate and reasonable responses to his complaints. It was entitled to place the bus stop outside Mr X’s house. It has explained the process followed. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman