Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate how the Council has dealt with the complainant’s concerns about the safety of a new roundabout. It is unlikely he would find evidence of fault by the Council causing the complainant significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr C, has complained the Council has not taken action in response to his concerns about the safety of a roundabout near his home. Mr C says the Council should lower the height of the roundabout to improve visibility.

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’.
3. 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;
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

4. 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

5. I have considered what Mr C said in his complaint and discussed it with him. Mr C commented on a draft before I made this decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr C is concerned about safety aspects of a new roundabout near his home built by a developer as required by the planning consent for the development.
7. The Council has considered Mr C’s concerns and is satisfied the roundabout meets the appropriate highways standards. However, it has asked the developer to take some action to reduce the height of the roundabout.
8. One particular issue of concern to Mr C was that the roundabout does not comply with design guidance in a government publication ‘CD116 Geometric design of roundabouts’. However, this document clearly states it relates to new and improved junctions on trunk roads. While the Council says it has had regard to any guidance which is relevant, it does not directly apply to the roundabout of concern to Mr C.
9. While I appreciate Mr C disagrees with its assessment, it is for the Council’s professional highways engineers to decide if the roundabout meets safety standards.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. There is nothing to suggest fault in how the Council has considered the matter. Further, if there had been fault by the Council, it is unlikely we would find this has caused Mr C significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman