Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s consultation for a Traffic Regulation Order. This is because we cannot question the Council’s decision that the Order was necessary or, therefore, say the outcome of the process should have been different.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to properly consult about a proposal to introduce a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) outside her shop. She says notices about the TRO were not specific about the section of road it would cover and the Council has provided no evidence in support of its decision that it is necessary.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
5. The Council accepts it should have been more descriptive about the section of road affected but we could not say that if it had been, the outcome would have been different. This is because the Council remains of the view that the TRO is necessary for traffic management and road safety reasons. It is therefore more likely than not that even if the notices had given more information, and Mrs X and her customers had objected, the outcome would have been the same.
6. I appreciate Mrs X disagrees with the Council on this point but it is not for us to question its judgement that the TRO is necessary. We cannot therefore say it should not have gone ahead. We also cannot quash the TRO or force the Council to revoke it as Mrs X would like.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we cannot say any fault by the Council wrongly affected its decision or achieve the outcome Mrs X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman