Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s closure of a highway for a Remembrance Service event. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council placing items connected with a Remembrance service on the cycleway which is part of a highway she uses regularly. She says she was put at risk by having to use alternatives which involved other traffic. She wants the Council to give an assurance this will not take place in future events.

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
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X says she was prevented from using a cycle lane in the city because items connected with a Remembrance Service event were stored on the highway obstructing the cycle lane. She says the Council is responsible for ensuring rights of way on highways are kept clear for traffic to use.
7. The Council told Ms X that it as highway authority has powers to close highways to traffic and suspend the normal highway regulations for specific events. In this case the highway was subject to a temporary prohibition of traffic order, and this was previously notified to the public as it is each year. The Council told Ms X that the highway and cycleway were closed by legal order and that it would do so at future events for highway management reasons.
8. The Ombudsman may not question the merits of decisions which have been made in a proper manner. This means we 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 closure of a highway for a Remembrance Service event. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman