Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to erect correct speed limit signs. This is because the complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice as a result of the alleged fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr B, says the Council has failed to erect the correct signs at some of the entrances to a 20mph speed zone. He says one entrance to the zone has a large 30mph sign on display, but this then changes to 20mph repeater signs on subsequent lamp posts. And at another entrance, the 30mph sign has been temporarily covered. Mr B says it has caused him a great deal of anxiety as he has not been able to ascertain the correct speed limit, so he is worried about receiving a speeding fine.
2. The Council says it has been unable to source the material to be able to erect the correct signs at all the entrances.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

4. And we may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered:
• Mr B’s complaint to the Ombudsman;
• Mr B’s 14 May complaint to the Council and its 30 May complaint response;
• Mr B’s comments on a draft version of this statement.

Back to top

What I found

6. I appreciate Mr B says it is unclear what the speed limit is at the entrances to the 20mph zone, and that he is concerned he may receive a speeding fine in the future.
7. But the Ombudsman cannot investigate or remedy possible future injustice because the law does not allow us to consider something that has not yet happened.
8. In my view, any residual injustice arising from the alleged fault by the Council is not so significant as to warrant the Ombudsman pursuing the matter further.
9. And if Mr B did receive a speeding fine in the future, it would be open to him to raise his concerns about the signage as a defence in court if he was prosecuted. So, the restriction detailed in paragraph 4 above would be likely to apply to a complaint about such matters.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint. This is because the alleged fault has not caused him a significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman