Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to provide additional speed limit repeater signs. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to provide additional speed restriction signs after it agreed to do so. He says he is concerned about speeding traffic in his area.

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 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 and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained to the Council about speeding traffic on roads in his area following the involvement of his pet in a traffic accident. He asked for stricter enforcement of speeding, additional signs and traffic calming measures. The Council informed him that the Police are responsible for speed enforcement and that there were currently no traffic calming measures programmed. This may be considered in future but would require a traffic regulation order.
6. The Council did agree as a goodwill gesture to provide additional repeater signs on one of the roads Mr X complained about. He later complained to us because the signs were not provided within the timescale and the Council told him that it would only provide them on one road and not both the roads he is concerned about.
7. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint and apologised for the delay in providing the additional signs. It said this was due to a problem with its contractors and that it would install them before the end of March. I can find no confirmation from the Council that agreed to provide signs for any other roads besides the one which it agreed. If the Council fails to install the additional signs as agreed it would be reasonable for Mr X to submit a further complaint.
8. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice arising form the Council’s delay. The existing signs meet the highway regulations and the additional signs were an additional gesture by the highway authority. It remains for the local Police to enforce the speed limit.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to provide additional speed limit repeater signs. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman