Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to update road warning signs following a highway scheme. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice to Mr X which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s highway contractor leaving warning signs in place on the approach to a junction where there had been previous roadworks involving a change to a one-way system. He says signs of the reversion to two-way traffic were removed too soon, and those giving advanced warning of roadworks were left unnecessarily too long.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says following the end of carriageway works in his area, the Council removed signs shortly after a temporary one-way system was returned to two-way. He says he say motorists, after the reversion, driving down the wrong carriageway which could have led to serious consequences.
6. He complained to the Council that as well as removing the carriageway reversion signs too hastily, the contractors left more distant yellow warning signs of roadworks in place, which eh says encouraged motorists to believe the earlier one-way system remained in place.
7. The Council inspected the site, and it considers that there was no risk to motorists from the remaining signs. It told him it is not responsible for motorists misreading or ignoring signs and they are expected to read the road conditions as they are.
8. I do not consider that the Council’s actions with regard to the signs caused Mr X any injustice. The layout of the carriageways is visible from the roundabout junction and motorists should follow the existing layouts of a road, rather than anticipate what might be ahead. The yellow warning signs did not indicate any specific highway changes and should have alerted drivers to be aware of any new road layout.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to update road warning signs following a highway scheme. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice to Mr X which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman