The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to implement traffic calming measures in Mr X’s village. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision to justify an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to implement traffic calming measures in his village. He says speeding traffic increases the risk of crashes in the village and makes it difficult for him to exit and re-enter his property. He wants the Council to implement a reduced speed limit and increased road signage.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X lives on the main road through his village. The road has a speed limit of 30mph. He asked the Council to implement a 20mph speed limit and increase signage on the road.
The Council refused. It said it had to prioritise highway works and needed a strong evidence base to make changes to historic road layouts. It explained there was no recorded crash pattern on the road in the last three years and average speeds were within the speed limit. It said it was working with the parish council on implementing new safety camera signage once it had police approval.
We will not investigate this complaint. The Council is entitled to decide how to prioritise works to the highway. It has considered information from Mr X and its own data and decided there was insufficient evidence to justify a change to the road layout or to reduce the speed limit. This is a decision the Council is entitled to make.
We cannot question a decision because someone disagrees with it. There must be evidence of fault in how the Council made the decision. In this case, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation. We cannot question a decision taken without fault.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman