Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to create a low traffic neighbourhood where the complainant lives. There is nothing to indicate fault in how the Council decided to introduce the scheme.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has decided to introduce a low traffic neighbourhood (LTN) where she lives. She says it failed to full an openly consult residents and had ignored the disabled, the elderly and non-English speaking people.
2. She says this has made her anxious and depressed and she worried she will not be able to get home in her car.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. We do not act as an appeal body. 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 that is likely to have affected the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council has decided to introduce a low traffic neighbourhood. It made this decision having followed the process for making a traffic regulation order (TRO).
8. The Council’s website shows the consultation it held with residents. In addition to following the statutory procedure, the Council sent letters to residents, made information available on its website, held events, and used social and mainstream media. It also held meetings with disability groups and groups representing the elderly. Information was also available in different languages.
9. There was a statutory consultation period between January and February 2024, as part of the TRO process.
10. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we cannot question the Council’s decision unless there has been fault in the way it made its decision. In this case, there is a clear record of the Council’s consideration of all objections it received. The Council also followed the correct TRO process and its website shows the action it took to consult with residents on the proposals.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council consulted residents before deciding to make the TRO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman