Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s introduction of an experimental traffic order for highway changes in Mr X’s neighbourhood. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to give sufficient consideration to resident’s concerns about traffic measures implement in his neighbourhood. He says the new scheme introduced in 2022 has caused inconvenience and upset for him and other residents.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says the Council’s introduction of traffic management features, such as closures, one way streets and obstacles was undertaken without giving proper consideration to the objections by residents. As a result he says he and other residents have been subjected to various inconveniences and issues with the new restrictions caused by planters being placed in various locations.
6. The Council carried out informal consultation with residents about the experimental scheme in 2021. It says this included leaflets, paper and online surveys and a site meeting at which Mr X and other residents were able to raise their concerns. Some changes were made to the proposed order as a result of the objections before it was Implemented in May 2022.
7. Experimental traffic orders are introduced under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The legislation allows experimental orders to be introduced without formal consultation, unlike permanent traffic regulation orders. The experimental order is itself intended to act as a consultation exercise by trialling proposed measures which may later be made permanent. There is a six-month objection period which allows objectors to comment on the scheme as it is in-situ.
8. In this case the Council did carry out informal consultation even though this was not a requirement. However, any such consultation is not a referendum and the Council was free to impose the order once it had given formal notice to do so in April 2022. The order has effect for 18 months and ends in November 2023. Any objections and feedback on the scheme will then be considered before a decision is made to either make it permanent or to discontinue it.
9. We may not question the merits of decisions which have been properly made. We do not comment on judgements councils make, unless they are affected by fault in the decision-making process. In this case the Council has followed the requirements of the legislation when introducing the order and Mr X’s concerns will be considered when the scheme trial is ended.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s introduction of an experimental traffic order for highway changes in Mr X’s neighbourhood. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman