Summary: Mr B says the Council has failed to provide appropriate safety measures to a section of road. There are many accidents, resulting in damage to Mr B’s property. Because the accidents do not involve personal injury, they do not trigger the Council’s traffic and transport policy. Mr B says this policy is flawed. It is not fault for the Council to prioritise its limited budget towards casualty reduction. The Council has done works to improve this site under its traffic management programme. Mr B is not satisfied those works are enough, but I find no fault in how the Council decided what was appropriate action.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr B, says the Council’s policy for deciding when to provide safety measures to roads is flawed; it only considers action where incidents lead to hospitalisation. Mr B’s property backs onto a major roundabout where he says there have been over 20 incidents in the last five years, and three have resulted in damage to his property. Mr B has had to claim on insurance which has increased his premiums, but the overriding concern is that of their safety when using the garden and for the safety of their property. Mr B wants the Council to install crash barriers along the section of road where the boundary to his property is.

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 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)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered:
• Information provided by Mr B.
• Information provided by the Council in response to my enquiries.
• The Road Traffic Act 1988.
• The Department for Environment’s ‘Circular Roads No 12/75’
• Responses from both parties to a draft of this statement.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B’s property is within 15 metres of a roundabout on a 70 mile per hour road. Mr B says there have been over 20 incidents in the last five years, three of which have destroyed part of his fence. Mr B has provided photographs showing cars through his fence. Mr B has had to claim on his home insurance to repair his fence, which has increased his premiums. But his main concern is the safety of the junction for users and the safety of using his garden if accidents continue to happen.
6. Local authorities have various statutory duties related to road safety, including taking steps to reduce and prevent accidents, promoting road safety, and securing the safe movement of traffic and pedestrians.
7. The Road Traffic Act 1988 says councils must carry out studies into vehicle accidents on their roads. In response to those studies the Council must take the measures it considers appropriate to prevent such accidents.
8. The law does not define what is meant by accidents. The Council uses a National database called Stats19 which is based on accidents reported to the police, and therefore are accidents involving personal injury. The gov.uk says the Stats19 data are not a complete record of all injury accidents and this should be borne in mind when using and analysing the data. However, they remain the most detailed, complete and reliable single source of information on road casualties covering the whole of Great Britain, for monitoring trends over time.
9. The Ombudsman would not criticise the Council for using this national source of data as its basis for studying accidents in its area.
10. The Council’s ‘Traffic and Transport Policy’ focusses on casualty reduction measures. It uses criteria to identify which areas may be suitable for casualty reduction measures. The Council will act where there have been seven collisions in the most recent three years, five collisions in the most recent two years, or three collisions in the most recent year. The Council says this does not apply to the location by Mr B’s house. Mr B says there have been more collisions than this, just that those collisions have not caused personal injury.
11. The Council says it must prioritise due to budget constraints, and therefore it focusses its budget towards casualty reduction. The Department for Environment’s circular called ‘Roads No 12/75’ recognises that councils may be constrained in the resources they can commit to work on the promotion of road safety; so, focusses on road deaths and injuries.
12. As well as studying the Stats19 data, the Council also looks at any safety concern raised with it through its general enquiries system or reported directly to it. Such concerns are investigated and assessed as part of its Traffic Management programme, which identifies schemes for the next financial year. The Council dealt with Mr B’s reports of traffic collisions in this way. The Council carried out road improvements at the area of road near Mr B’s house. The Council completed these works in April 2019. Mr B says the action the Council took has not improved the situation as there have been several accidents since; three during the Ombudsman’s involvement.

Was there fault causing injustice?

13. The law says the Council must carry out studies into vehicle accidents on its roads. The Council does this by using formal national data from the police. This data only includes accidents involving personal injury. The Ombudsman cannot say this is fault, the law does not define ‘accidents’ and it is appropriate the Council uses a recognised formal collection of data to study.
14. It is also appropriate the Council focusses its limited resource into what it considers most important. The law allows the Council to take whatever measures it considers appropriate to prevent accidents. Therefore, the Council has discretion to decide what measures it considers are appropriate. Based on government guidance, and its own views, the Council chooses to focus on casualty reduction.
15. The Council uses criteria to help it assess where to focus its resource, and that is a fair way to decide where to spend its money. Although there have been many accidents near Mr B’s house, they have not been accidents causing personal injury so, do not trigger the Council’s criteria to take action to reduce casualties.
16. It is undoubtedly an inconvenience to Mr B to have cars damaging his property and is a worry about personal safety. The Council has listened to these concerns and acted under a different regime to its Traffic and Transport Policy. The Council has improved the road as part of its Traffic Management programme. The Council has acted to make the roundabout more obvious to approaching drivers. I cannot say it is fault for the Council not to install a crash barrier as is Mr B’s preference. It is the Council’s role to decide what action is appropriate and there is no reason for me to question or criticise its decision. The Council has undertaken works following a study of the site and professional officers decided what action to take.
17. Mr B will need to report all accidents to the Council so it can assess the data and decide if further action is needed. It will need some time for the Council to interrogate whether its actions have improved accidents at the site, and whether future accidents warrant further works.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I have completed my investigation on the basis there is no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman