Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to reposition a bus stop pole. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council moved a bus stop pole near to his property. He said he and his family are now being affected by noise and rubbish and he is concerned about their privacy. Mr X wants the Council to move the bus stop pole.

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 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X said the Council relocated the bus stop pole from the actual location of the bus stop and placed it outside his home. He said the passengers on the bus and people waiting for the bus are invading his privacy as they can see into his garden and through his windows. He said people are talking loudly at the bus stop which is disrupting him and his family. He also said rubbish has started to accumulate outside his home. Mr X said the Council did not consult with him before it made the change.
7. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint. As part of its response, the Council said:
• it wanted to replace the pole to upgrade its bus stop infrastructure. The new pole displayed improved bus stop information. It was bigger in size and so the Council decided to relocate it to where there was more space on the public footway so it would not affect pedestrians and cyclists;
• it was not required to notify the residents of the change. The bus stop has been at the location for over 20 years. The Council said it only repositioned the pole;
• it recognised people would wait for the bus however, not many people at one given time waited for the bus at this location and the bus only stopped for a short period of time;
• if Mr X was experiencing anti-social behaviour coming from the people waiting at the bus stop, he would need to contact the police or the borough Council; and
• it would contact the borough Council to look into placing a bin by the pole in response to Mr X’s concerns of rubbish appearing near his home.
8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council explained its considerations when it decided to reposition the pole. We cannot question its decision simply because Mr X disagrees with it.
9. Furthermore, the Council addressed Mr X’s concerns about his privacy, noise and rubbish. It advised Mr X to contact other bodies if he was concerned about anti-social behaviour and said it would look into providing a bin. This was appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman