Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about vehicles causing obstructions on his road. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about poor communication as we could not add any further meaningful outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to properly consider and address his reports of repeated obstructions by vehicles on his road. He also said it delayed in responding to his correspondence.
2. Mr X said these issues impacted his ability to safely access his property and caused unnecessary stress and an increased risk of collisions. He wanted the Council to:
• carry out a further assessment of his concerns;
• provide an in-depth explanation for its decision; and
• implement parking measures to address his concerns.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X reported his concerns about vehicle obstructions on his road to the Council.
7. The Council considered Mr X’s concerns and discussed them with its Highways Team and its Environmental Services team. It responded to Mr X and explained it would not be implementing measures on his road and explained its reasoning for this; it also advised Mr X to apply for a H-Bar marking outside his home to reduce the impact on him.
8. We will not investigate this issue because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation. It considered and responded to each of Mr X’s concerns. While Mr X disagrees with the outcome, this in itself does not mean the Council was at fault.
9. Mr X also complained to the Council about communication failures by its officers.
10. The Council responded to Mr X and acknowledged and apologised for this issue. It explained this was caused by a member of staff handing over the case to a colleague. It confirmed it had reinforced its internal policies and processes to prevent this issue from happening again in the future.
11. We will not investigate this matter as the Council has acknowledged its shortcomings, apologised to Mr X and taken steps to prevent similar issues in the future. An investigation by the Ombudsman would not add any further meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about vehicles causing obstructions on his road. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about poor communication as we could not add any further meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman