Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance and traffic management matters. An investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council has failed to respond appropriately to concerns she raised about highways maintenance and traffic management matters. She says this has caused frustration and her concerns remain unresolved.

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:

• 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))

3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained about several issues related to highway maintenance, speeding and an absence of traffic calming measures on a local road and parking problems. She also complained the Council had initially failed to respond to her complaint about these matters.
7. In its complaint response, the Council:
• Apologised for its initial failure to respond to her complaint, attributing this to human error.
• Acknowledged that the yellow lines she referred to were faded and needed repainting. It said the road was awaiting resurfacing and once this work was completed, it would repaint all the yellow lines. It said it was not a good use of its resources to repaint the lines before the road was resurfaced. It would keep her updated when it had a date for the resurfacing work to start.
• Said it was aware of the parking issue she raised and intended to introduce a loading restriction to help address this.
• Said it had considered her concerns related to speeding and her request for traffic calming measures. It had reviewed speed data it had previously collected on the road. It did not consider there was a need for further traffic calming measures at this time.
8. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has appropriately considered and responded to Ms X’s concerns. It has explained the actions it is taking and how it has reached its decision that further traffic calming measures are not needed at this time. I accept Ms X may not agree with Council’s decisions or may want works to be completed sooner, but I am satisfied the Council has appropriately considered and responded to the matters raised, so we cannot question the decisions reached. An investigation by us would be unlikely to reach a different outcome.
9. We will also not investigate the Council’s handling of her complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to investigate complaints handling where we decide not to investigate the substantive matters.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we could not add to the Council’s response and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman