Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to install a pedestrian crossing. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and in any event, any injustice Mr X may have experienced is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council refused his request to install a pedestrian crossing at a nearby level crossing and failed to properly consider his concerns. He said this has caused him concern for the safety of pedestrians and he wanted the Council to reassess its decision.

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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(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. Mr X asked the Council to consider installing a pedestrian crossing at a nearby level crossing due to safety concerns. The Council rejected Mr X’s request and
   Mr X complained, saying the Council had not considered the concerns he had raised.
6. In its complaint response, the Council explained how it had considered Mr X’s concerns but due to other factors and visibility concerns, its position remained unchanged.
7. The Council confirmed to Mr X the location would be included in the next pedestrian crossing review and asked for the marking and signing to be checked to ensure it meets the standards.
8. The Council considered Mr X’s request and explained why the installation of a pedestrian crossing would not be viable. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.
9. In any event, any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. 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 service provider, or
• there are continuous and ongoing instances of a lower-level injustice that remain unresolved over a long period of time.
10. Mr X’s concern about safety would not meet this threshold.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and in any event, any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman