Torbay Council (19 019 495)

Category : Transport and highways > Traffic management

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 06 Apr 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council will not introduce traffic calming measures suggested by the complainant. It is unlikely he would find evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr B, has complained the Council will not carry out traffic calming measures on the road where he lives. He also complains the Council will not meet with him on site to discuss his concerns.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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’.
  2. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:
  • it is unlikely we would find fault;
  • it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome; or
  • we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
  1. 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 that is likely to have affected the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I have considered what Mr B said in his complaint and the Council’s response to his concerns. I have also seen the Council’s policy document ‘A Road Safety Strategy for Torbay 2017-2020’.

Back to top

What I found

  1. The elected Members of the Council have adopted a policy for giving priority to highways works which is based on an analysis of accident data.
  2. The Council has considered the concerns raised by Mr B. It has explained why, under its policy, it cannot give priority to the works he has suggested. Given this, it says no useful purpose would be served by meeting him on site.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has not ignored Mr B’s concerns and has explained why it will not carry out traffic calming measures. It is for the Council to decide what works to carry out and we are unlikely to find fault in how it has done this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings