Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to replace double yellow lines on a section of road. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault causing Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council has failed to replace the double yellow lines on a section of road near where he lives. He says this is a serious safety issue as there is a risk taxis parking on the road will cause an accident.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I reviewed the information provided by Mr X and contacted the Council for an update on the status of the repairs. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and considered his comments.

Back to top

What I found

4. Councils paint double yellow lines on the public highway to warn motorists of parking restrictions. Where the lines are so faded that motorists cannot see them, councils may decide they cannot reasonably enforce the restrictions as enforcement may be overturned on appeal.
5. Mr X is unhappy the Council has failed to replace the double yellow lines on a section of road approximately one mile away from his home. He says that as a result taxis park on the road and this may cause accidents.
6. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The Council accepts the need to replace the double yellow lines and the work has been added to its maintenance list. But it doesn’t consider the issue a priority and it does not therefore intend to deal with it immediately. It is not for the Ombudsman to say the Council should prioritise the works simply because Mr X considers they are important; the Council’s contractor is responsible for assessing defects in the public highway and it has categorised the repairs using its risk-based approach to ensure resources are allocated where they are required most. Mr X may disagree with its decision but this itself is not evidence of fault.
7. The issue also does not cause Mr X significant personal injustice. The section of road is more than a mile away from his property and he does not have to use it. He reported one near-miss to the Council but this was the result of the actions of another driver. It is therefore unlikely we could attribute it to any fault by the Council in not replacing the double yellow lines.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council causing Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman