Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the implementation of a traffic management order. There is insufficient evidence of fault and the personal injustice claimed is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council implemented traffic management orders without proper consultation.

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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council implemented traffic management orders for several streets with schools on.
6. Ms X complains the Council failed to properly consult before adopting the measures and did not consider alternatives. Ms X complains Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras were installed before the consultation had finished. She says this undermined her confidence in the consultation process.
7. I have considered the Council’s consultation and community engagement. The Council properly considered the objections made and recorded them appropriately. The Council has also demonstrated alternative options were considered. These were also recorded appropriately. I have seen insufficient evidence of fault in the process the Council followed when making the decision to implement the measures. There is also insufficient personal injustice claimed by Ms X to warrant investigation.
8. Ms X has complained about how the Council dealt with her requests for information. However, the Information Commissioner’s Office is the appropriate body to consider complaints about these matters.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault and the personal injustice claimed is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman