Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (21 002 033)

Category : Transport and highways > Traffic management

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 09 Jul 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Authority failed to properly consult with residents and businesses about a proposed cycle lane route. This is because the injustice the complainant claims is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, who I will call Mr C, complains that the Authority failed to properly consult with residents about a proposed cycle lane route close to his home and business. Mr C says this means he has not been able to comment on the proposals.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the Mr C and the Authority.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
  3. The complainant now has an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. The Authority plans to introduce new cycle lanes close to the area Mr C lives. In July 2020, Mr C became aware of the plans but was unable to comment on them because the consultation period had ended. Mr C complains that the Council failed to consult with him about the plans, despite his property and business being close to the proposed route.
  2. The Council say it sent leaflets to nearby properties and letters to nearby businesses which signposted people to submit their comments online or over the telephone. The Council received a number of responses, including from people living close to Mr C.
  3. The Council has said that although the first round of consultation has ended, it is currently planning a second round of consultation when residents will have a further opportunity to comment on the plans.
  4. I will not investigate Mr C’s complaint. It is unfortunate that Mr C did not receive either the leaflet or letter informing him of the plans, and I note this is likely to have caused him some frustration. However, I do not consider this has caused a significant enough injustice to warrant our investigation. Particularly as there will be another period of consultation, therefore Mr C has not missed out on his opportunity to comment on the proposals.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the injustice he claims is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

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