Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s consultation before it decided to proceed with implementing a road closure. It is unlikely we would find fault and there is no significant injustice. In any case we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mrs X said the Council’s consultation exercise relating to a road closure impacting on vehicular traffic, was not meaningful and procedurally unfair. She said it did not sufficiently consider the impact on the wider road network and she is now concerned about the increase in vehicular traffic though the area where she lives.
2. Mrs X wants the Council not to proceed with the road closure.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X was unhappy because she said the Council’s consultation about a proposed road closure was skewed toward a set group of people and did not take account of the wider impact on others.
8. According to the Council’s records, it identified why it was considering the proposed road closure, including the benefits and the negative impacts. It also set out that it carried out a series of consultations since 2021, including online surveys.
9. Additionally, these records show it carried out an equality impact assessment, and considered the impact on vehicular traffic, including through Mrs X’s area. It also said it would carry out additional monitoring through Mrs X’s area to assess any impact.
10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault, because in making its decision, the Council considered the relevant information.
11. Additionally, there is no evidence the Council’s actions have caused Mrs X a significant injustice. We will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by the Council. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the complainant is using their enquiry as a way of raising a wider community campaign about something of general concern but where they have not suffered direct or significant injustice.
12. Finally, Mrs X wants the Council not to implement this proposal and we could not direct this, so cannot achieve the outcome she is seeking.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault and there is no significant injustice. In any case we cannot achieve her desired outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman