Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s introduction of a road closure which restricted access to businesses by cars from outside a village. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to carry out sufficient consultation with businesses and residents when it closed a road in a nearby village. As a result, he says his village hall management lost income when access to an art class from outside the village was restricted and it had to be cancelled. He says the Council failed to carry out sufficient consultation with the management committee who could have had better opportunity to manage the affected events. He wants the Council to compensate the committee for loss of earnings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says the lack of consultation by the Council when it closed a road which affected a nearby village led to a loss of income when a class at the village hall was cancelled due to restricted access.
6. The Council says it gave 14 days’ notice about the closure and that the village’s local Ward councillor was notified as well as information being available on its website. The Council says it provided adequate signage for a diversion and that although there was some vehicular restriction, businesses were still accessible on foot.
7. The provisions of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 allow a highway authority to close roads where works are to be carried out. The Council gave the required notice and provided a diversion. There is no provision in the legislation for compensation to be available for loss of income by business affected by the closure.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s introduction of a road closure which restricted access to businesses by cars from outside a village. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman