Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s installation of a speed table and ramps close to his home. We will not investigate because we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. Also, it would be reasonable for Mr X or his insurers to ask the court to consider a claim if he believes traffic vibration from the table is damaging his home.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complaints about a speed table close to his home. He says the Council has failed to investigate his complaint and refused to visit his home to witness the problem.
2. He says this is causing misery and concern since its construction. He feels vibrations and shock waves when buses and heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) cross the table.
3. Mr X believes the speed table should be re assessed and a way forward sought for a different kind of traffic calming. He says he and his neighbours know the situation will not get better unless some other form of measure is introduced.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint

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

5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X; and
• copies of his complaints to the Council and its responses; and
• Mr X’s comments on the draft version of this decision

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr X complains about vibration and noise from traffic, particularly buses, travelling over a speed table outside his house. He is concerned the vibrations are damaging his home. Also, Mr X says the speed table is unfit for purpose as buses are exceeding the 20mph speed limit at the site. And vibrations from the speed table are causing him and other residents much stress and suffering.
8. The Council says introduced the speed table as part of a new 20 mph zone. It also told Mr X that studies carried out by the Transport Research Laboratory over several years concluded that although traffic vibration can cause some nuisance to occupants. And there is no evidence to support the assertion that traffic vibration generated by speed humps can cause structural damage to buildings.
9. The Council says traffic data from a 7- day monitoring period shows the average speed at the site was 20.2mph one way and 20.6mph the other.
10. Mr X continued to raise the same issues and asked that monitoring equipment be installed in his home and an officer visits the site.
11. The Council confirms the speed table and ramps have been inspected and, after modification, are constructed according to the design specifications. It is suitable for buses and heavy good vehicles (HGVs). It has passed Mr X’s concerns about bus speeds to Transport for London (TfL). it also confirmed that there was no equipment available to monitor vibration inside his home.
12. I have not seen any evidence of fault with the way the Council has considered Mr X’s complaint. He wants the Council to replace the speed table with an alternative method of traffic calming, but the Ombudsman cannot achieve this for him.
13. Mr X is concerned the vibration from buses crossing the speed table may damage his property. Should this occur, it would be reasonable for him or his insurers to ask a court to consider whether the damage to his property has been caused by vibration from the speed table.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate this complaint. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. And, should his property be damaged, it is reasonable for Mr X for him or his insurers to ask a court to consider any damage was caused by the Council’s installation of the speed table.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman