Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to re-instate road studs which were removed from the highway during resurfacing works. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council deciding to re-instate the cats eye road studs on an A-road through his village following their removal for resurfacing works. He wants the studs to be deleted because he says they create noise from traffic impact and encourage speeding on the straight road.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
3. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

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. Mr X asked the Council to consider not replacing the previous reflective road studs on the highway in his village following their removal for resurfacing works. He says the features cause noise from vehicles passing over them and that they encourage motorists to break the 40mph limit at night by making the road more visible.
7. The Council says the studs were installed previously according to national guidance for safety features on A-roads. They are a recognised safety feature and the Council as highway authority has a duty to consider means of introducing traffic safety.
8. When considering complaints, we may not act like an appeal body and question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members. This means the Ombudsman will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to re-instate road studs which were removed from the highway during resurfacing works. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman