The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to put a zebra crossing outside the complainant’s home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, complains the Council will not put a zebra crossing outside her home. She needs the crossing to keep her son safe as he comes home from school.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 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))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and comments Mrs X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
There used to be a zebra crossing and bus stop close to Mrs X’s home. Her son would get the bus home and use the zebra crossing. The Council says her son’s walk from the bus stop was about 90m.
The Council changed the road layout. The bus stop has moved and the zebra crossing was removed. A light controlled crossing has been installed further along the road.
Mrs X asked the Council to re-install a zebra crossing outside her home. She does not object to the new position for the bus stop but says her son now has to walk along the path to the new crossing, cross using the lights, and then walk back to the house. She says this adds to his school day and tiredness and he often carries heavy bags. Mrs X says she is considering using a taxi, or moving house, to ensure her son’s safety. She says she will hold the Council liable if there are any incidents. The Council says the walk from the new bus stop to Mrs X’s home, via the new crossing, is about 150m.
The Council said it would not install a zebra crossing. It explained the changes had been made following a consultation and were part of an integrated walking and cycling scheme. The Council said the scheme had been designed to ensure a maximum walking distance of 400m to a bus stop and the crossings had been located to link to a school and cycle/walking routes. The Council said the walking distances are within the recommended maximum and creating an extra crossing could cause confusion or create danger.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The road layout has been changed as part of a wider scheme and the crossing and bus stop have been designed to accommodate maximum walking distances and safety issues. The Council has to consider the needs of the whole community rather than individual households. Mrs X disagrees that installing a zebra crossing would create confusion but the key point is that the crossings have been installed as part of a wider plan which cannot accommodate requests from individual residents outside the agreed design plan.
I also will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. Mrs X’s son has a safe route home via the crossing. His walking distance has increased by about 60m which does not represent an injustice requiring an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman