Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council dealt with her request to install a controlled pedestrian crossing. The Council was at fault for failing to respond to Ms X’s request, failing to explain its decision and failing to respond to her complaint. This caused Ms X frustration and uncertainty. The Council will apologise and write to Ms X to properly explain its decision.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains on behalf of Mr Y that the Council failed to assess the possibility of installing a controlled pedestrian crossing near to Mr Y’s home, despite saying in December 2022 that it would do this. Ms X also said the Council failed to respond to correspondence and complaints about this matter.
2. Ms X says the Council’s failure to provide a pedestrian crossing means that Mr Y cannot walk to local amenities independently.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

Council complaints procedure

7. The Council says it will try to respond to stage one complaints within 15 working days. If it is not able to do so, it will contact the complainant to give them a realistic complaint response date.
8. If the Council does not respond within ten weeks. A complainant is entitled to escalate to stage two.

Ombudsman principles of good administrative practice

9. In 2018 the Ombudsman published a guidance document setting out the standards we expect. We expect councils to deal with people helpfully, promptly and sensitively. Councils should also clearly explain the rationale for decisions.

Background information

10. Ms X said the Council agreed to assess the possibility of installing a controlled pedestrian crossing near to Mr Y’s home in December 2022, to help Mr Y with his independence due to a disability. Ms X said she expected the Council to take around six months to complete the assessment.
11. The Council said, at the time of the request, it decided it could not justify the installation of the crossing, but it would add her request to a list for consideration of highways works for the years 2023-27.

What happened?

12. In September 2023, Ms X wrote to the Council to ask for an update on the assessment. The Council said it wrote to Ms X shortly after this, saying it would respond to her, week commencing 18 September 2023, but there is no record of the Council doing this.
13. As the Council did not respond, Ms X contacted it again in early November asking for an update.
14. The Council told us it replied to Ms X on 9 November and asked for a meeting to discuss the enquiry. The Council said Ms X was happy to meet, but it interpreted her response as wanting a full written reply before arranging a call or meeting.
15. As the Council did not contact Ms X again after this, she contacted it again in December to ask it to provide an update.
16. Ms X emailed the Council again at the end of January 2024, unhappy that it had still not responded. Ms X said she considered her previous contact to amount to a stage one complaint, and because of this, she wanted the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two.
17. The Council instead decided to record this contact as a stage one complaint, which it confirmed it failed to respond to.
18. Ms X tried to make a complaint to the Ombudsman in March but needed a final complaint response from the Council to do this. Ms X emailed the Council asking it to respond by the end of the following month.
19. As the Council did not respond to Ms X, she made a further complaint to the Ombudsman in May.
20. The Council responded to our enquiries, and apologised for the delay in responding to Ms X.
21. It said it had reviewed its records and contacted officers that used to work in the department, and from this, it confirmed that no pedestrian crossing assessment had taken place. The Council could not tell us if Ms X’s request had been considered as part of the highways works for the years 2023-27.
22. The Council explained it would not normally assess for controlled crossings outside a person’s property, unless both the environment and site conditions needed it to do so. It also said that it is not practical nor financially sustainable to provide controlled crossings outside people’s houses in residential areas.
23. The Council told us it receives many requests from residents covering many highway related issues and it is not possible to action every single request, due to funding limitations.
24. However, it accepted its failure to respond to Ms X was unsatisfactory and unacceptable.

Analysis

Pedestrian crossing assessment

25. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made their decisions. We may criticise a council if, for example, it has not followed an appropriate procedure, not considered relevant information, or not properly explained a decision it has made. We call this fault, and, where we find it, we can consider any consequences of the fault and ask the relevant council to address these.
26. However, we do not make operational or policy decisions on councils’ behalf, provide a right of appeal against their decisions, or seek to replace their judgement with our own. If a council has made a decision without fault then we cannot criticise it, no matter how strongly a complainant feels it is wrong.
27. What that means in this particular case is that it is not for me to make my own judgement about whether the Council should have completed an assessment for a pedestrian crossing, nor whether it should have installed a pedestrian crossing. However, I can consider whether the Council properly made and explained its decisions about this.
28. In response to my enquiries, the Council explained its decision to not complete an assessment and showed it considered the information available. This was a decision it was entitled to make. However, its failure to explain this decision to Ms X was fault. This caused Ms X uncertainty about what action, if any, the Council took in relation to her request.
29. Ms X contacted the Council several times about the assessment (in September, November and December 2023 and January and March 2024). The Council either failed to respond, delayed in responding or said it would respond and then failed to.
30. This is not in line with the Ombudsman’s ‘Principles of Good Administrative Practice’ which says councils should deal with people helpfully, promptly and take responsibility for their actions.
31. I find fault in the failure of the Council to respond to Ms X’s communications in a timely manner and on some occasions, failing to respond at all. This caused Ms X frustration and uncertainty.

Complaint response

32. Ms X made a complaint to the Council at the end of January 2024. The Council should have responded to this within 15 working days or told her the date it would respond.
33. The Council accepts that it did not respond at all to Ms X’s complaint. This was not in line with its complaint procedure and is fault. This caused Ms X avoidable frustration and uncertainty.

Back to top

Action

34. Within four weeks of our final decision, the Council will:
• apologise to Ms X and Mr Y for the faults identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making its apology; and

• write to Ms X to fully explain its decision to not complete a pedestrian crossing assessment.

35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

36. I find fault causing injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman