Summary: We will not investigate this complain that the Council has decided not to go ahead with changes to the highway outside the complainant’s home. It is unlikely we would find fault affected the Council’s decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mrs B, has complained the Council has decided not to go ahead with a traffic scheme outsider her home.

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. (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 Mrs B said in her complaint and background information provided by the Council.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mrs B believes the Council should make changes to the footpath outside her home. While it seems there was support for the proposal, the Council decided it would be against its Local Transport Plan and so would not go ahead.

Back to top

Final decision

7. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is nothing to suggest fault in how the Council decided not to go ahead with the proposal. In the absence of fault, we cannot question the merits of that decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman