Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council making changes to a highway layout. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council making changes to signs and prohibiting right turns and U-turns on a main road near his business. He says it will affect his business and jobs and that the works are unnecessary for highway safety and a waste of public money.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

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. Mr X says the Council introduced changes to the highway outside his business using a traffic regulation order. He believes the public was misled and that objections to the scheme during consultation were ignored and the scheme approved anyway.
6. The Council followed the procedure set out in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure)(England and Wales) Regulations 1996. This involved notifying the emergency services, posting a notice about the proposed order and carrying out local consultation.
7. Mr X was one of the majority of objectors out of 27 replies to the proposals. He says the Council should not have gone ahead with the order. The legislation does not require a highway authority to carry out public consultation and that any feedback it receives to notices is not a referendum on whether the order should be approved. The Council considered that the changes restricting manoeuvres on the main road were necessary for highway safety and the order was approved.
8. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made. I can see no evidence to suggest that the correct procedure for creating the traffic order was not followed.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council making changes to a highway layout. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman