Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to close a road to motorised vehicles and other traffic calming measures. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complained about the Council’s decision to close a road to motorised vehicles and other associated traffic calming measures. The road is close to Mr X’s home. Mr X has raised concerns about the consultation process and whether the positive response to the proposals was representative of the local community. Mr X has put forward alternative options. Mr X is concerned about the impact the Council’s decision will have on the local community.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The role of the Ombudsman is to look for administrative fault. We are not an appeal body for people who disagree with a council’s decision. We cannot question the merits of a decision unless there is evidence of fault in how it was reached.
7. It is clear Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision. But based on the evidence I have seen, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council for the Ombudsman to become involved.
8. The Council originally closed the road via a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Council then considered making the closure permanent. It followed the proper process to do this including a consultation exercise. The Council included the results of the consultation exercise in the report considered by the elected member with delegated powers for transport and highways matters. The report set out the background for the proposals and the reasons for recommending their approval. The elected member decided to approve the scheme. This is a decision they were entitled to take and the decision was properly recorded.
9. Because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the decision was reached we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman