Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a refused Community Highways Scheme. Ms X has not claimed a significant personal injustice, so an investigation is not warranted.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council refused to consider a community highways scheme she submitted on behalf of a local campaign group. Ms X says the scheme was refused despite having wide local support, and the Council’s decision means a local road continues to be dangerous for non-car users including herself.

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 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 Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council assessed Ms X’s proposal and decided it did not meet the criteria for full consideration. Ms X appealed the decision. The Council upheld the assessment decision and gave its reasons, with reference to its policy and actions it has already taken to increase road safety.
6. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means 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.
7. In addition, we will not normally investigate a complaint where the complainant is using their enquiry as a way of raising a wider community campaign about something of general concern, but where they have not suffered specific personal injustice.
8. I recognise road safety is important to Ms X and the group she represents. However, I do not consider there has been a specific and significant personal injustice that warrants the Ombudsman devoting time and public money to investigation. So, we will not investigate Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because Ms X has not claimed a significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman