Inadequate Road Safety Barriers
Use of temporary or inadequate road barriers that provide insufficient resistance in a collision, risking serious injury or death.
Source spread
Where this theme appears
This theme appears across 4 independent accountability sources, so the source mix matters as much as the headline total.
119 PFD reports
7 committee recs
1 IOPC rec
190 LGO/SPSO decisions
Browse by source
Source-grouped records are useful for tracing where a concern came from. Large sections show the 50 strongest matches for that source; counts still show the full theme total.
Prevention of Future Deaths reports(119)— showing 50 strongest matches
David Cox
Concerns: The coroner raised concerns about the narrow and acute bends on the bridleway, which provide no margin for error. Additionally, there is an absence of barriers between the track and the river, risking vehicles leaving the track and entering the water.
Response: • The Authority installed permanent signage and provided grit bins along the track. • The Authority commissioned a Survey Report identifying engineering measures for bank stabilisation and track widening, which … (AI summary)
Responded
Mustafa Cicek
Concerns: The coroner noted the bend at this location is a collision black spot and suggested improving chevron signs with yellow backgrounds and painting "SLOW" on the carriageway. Concerns were also raised about a eucalyptus sapling that will mature into a potential hazard.
Response (National Highways): • National Highways provided 'SLOW' road markings on the carriageway and confirmed the eucalyptus tree had been removed. • National Highways is planning to increase the number of chevrons on … (AI summary)
Overdue
Paul Rogerson
Concerns: The coroner noted inadequate protection, condition, and maintenance of river safety equipment like life buoys and throwing lines, alongside a lack of warning signs. Concerns were also raised regarding North Yorkshire Police training in river rescue protocols, water safety, and hypothermia first aid, and inter-service communication.
Overdue
Michael Telford
Concerns: The coroner noted a regular hazard of water spilling onto the B5302, which contributed to a fatality and is exacerbated by freezing weather, posing a risk of further accidents if not addressed.
Overdue
Mark Burgess
Concerns: The coroner noted that the decommissioned road lighting system on a section of the M65 motorway meant drivers could not see debris and damaged vehicles in darkness, contributing to a series of further collisions.
Overdue
Carl Morris
Concerns: Concerns were raised about the lack of a system to ensure compliance with PADI's requirement for up-to-date medical certificates for technical diving courses, noting that these requirements may be overlooked.
Response (PADI Europe): • PADI outlined its existing quality management and training systems, which include requirements for medical certificates, instructor training, and monitoring through course evaluation questionnaires. • PADI stated that its Instructor … (AI summary)
Responded
Janette Sutherland
Concerns: The presence of a drainage channel and concrete headwall represents a hazard to road users. A safety barrier should be erected to prevent vehicles leaving the carriageway and impacting the headwall.
Response (Caerphilly County Council): • Officers will investigate the site to provide recommendations and potential measures. • A survey of the site was conducted on 27 March 2014. • The Road Restraint Risk Assessment … (AI summary)
Response (Caerphilly County Council): • Caerphilly County Council undertook a topographic survey and a Road Restraint Risk Assessment Process (RRRAP) to evaluate the hazard. • The council decided to demolish the headwall and re-profile … (AI summary)
Responded
Sean Morley
Concerns: The coroner noted concerns regarding the A444, where pedestrians and cyclists frequently use the carriageway verge, yet there are no warning signs, street lights, or protective barriers despite a 70mph speed limit. This situation poses a risk of further fatal collisions.
Response (Warwickshire County Council): • A CCTV survey was commissioned to determine pedestrian and cyclist use, with analysis of the footage pending. • A feasibility study will be carried out to investigate introducing a … (AI summary)
Responded
Russell Long
Concerns: The coroner raised concerns about the damaged and overgrown parapet of the B5307 bridge, which had created a "ramp" that caused a vehicle to become airborne. This condition poses a foreseeable risk of similar accidents occurring if not repaired.
Response (Cumbria County Council): • Works were carried out to install a vehicle restraint system on the north-west side of the bridge leading up to the bridge and to raise the north-west parapet wall … (AI summary)
Responded
Francis Golding
Concerns: The coroner identified that the junction design at Vernon Place/Southampton Row leaves cyclists vulnerable, with no additional space in the bus lane. There has been slow progress on planned safety improvements for this junction, despite prior cyclist fatalities.
Response (Camden Council): • The Council laid anti-skid material across the Bloomsbury Way / Theobald’s Road corridor junction in 2012. • The Council implemented an experimental order on 31 January 2014 to permit … (AI summary)
Responded
Yasmin Richards
Concerns: The coroner noted a second death on the same A46 section within a year and recommended reviewing and reducing the speed limit on the 'Hartley Bends'. Improvements to road signs, carriageway markings, and the provision of rumble strips were also suggested to enhance driver safety.
Response (Highway Agency): • The Highway Agency completed road resurfacing and implemented a safety scheme, which included installing high friction surfacing and vehicle-activated signs. • The agency provided temporary advisory 30 mph signage. … (AI summary)
Responded
Anthony Ponting
Concerns: The coroner noted potential risks to railway crossing users due to reduced sighting lines from trackside vegetation, incorrectly positioned S.H.I boards, and tripping hazards on the crossing surface.
Response (Network Rail): • Trackside vegetation was cut back in August 2013 and is subject to routine six-monthly inspections. • The SLL sign on the down line was moved to 3 metres from … (AI summary)
Responded
Gavin Bradley, Mark Thorpe and Darren Thorpe
Concerns: The coroner questioned the feasibility of amending Riding Mill weir to incorporate a dedicated channel for canoes and kayaks, and constructing a safe upstream landing area with warnings for river exit during heavy flows.
Overdue
Kai Lambe
Concerns: The coroner raised concerns about the extreme risks posed by the weir and salmon chute at the location, noting insufficient warning signage. The report asks for improved safety measures and clarification of responsibility for the site.
Overdue
Alan Evans
Concerns: The coroner noted concerns regarding the road's single broken white line and obscured view, suggesting consideration of double white lines. They also recommended replacing protruding "old style cats eyes" with slim-line versions to minimise future risk.
Overdue
Dolores Hubbert
Concerns: The coroner raised concerns regarding the overall safety of a junction, specifically citing the adequacy of speed restrictions and the frequency of grass cutting, which could potentially obscure drivers' views.
Response (Sunderland City Council): • The Council will program an assessment of possible measures for the A690/Durham Road, East Rainton junction in 2015. • The Council intends to commence the statutory process to reduce … (AI summary)
Responded
Marcus Szigetvari
Concerns: The coroner noted the difficulty for drivers exiting Llanwonno Road due to busy traffic, leading to risky manoeuvres, with poor visibility contributing to misjudgement. There have been nineteen other collisions on this road since 2001, including two fatalities.
Response (Highways Streetcare Services): • The authority reviewed the junction's design, visibility, and street lighting arrangement, finding them compliant with current standards. • A review of personal injury collision data for the specific junction … (AI summary)
Responded
Leanne Gower
Concerns: Police do not routinely check or provide damage-only road incident data to councils, which stopped being recorded in 2011 for unclear reasons. This data is not consistently considered when determining necessary highway maintenance works, despite its potential usefulness.
Response (Northamptonshire County Council): • The council stated its Skidding Resistance Strategy, last reviewed in 2013/14, will be reviewed again to identify potential changes or improvements. • The Red Route process, which includes monthly … (AI summary)
Response (Northamptonshire Police): • Northamptonshire Police stated it would not recommend formal steps to collate and analyse damage-only collision data. • The organisation proposed to brief a group of road safety problem solvers … (AI summary)
Responded
Kevin Lawrenson
Concerns: The coroner raised concerns regarding the high number of accidents involving slow-moving vehicles at a specific road location, noting that existing warning signage appeared insufficient.
Response (National Highways): • National Highways instructed UK Highways M4O Limited to initiate work to improve signing on the southbound approach to the Stokenchurch Cutting. • The planned improvements include an additional 'Slow … (AI summary)
Responded
Christopher Taylor
Concerns: The dispatch team lacked immediate visibility of incoming incidents, impacting their ability to respond. The coroner also asked Sainsbury's to consider their landowner responsibility for river safety, including providing a life buoy station.
Response (Sainsburys Supermarkets Limited): • Sainsbury's installed temporary waist-height fencing along the upper car park walkway and erected bespoke signage. • A damaged life buoy was replaced, and existing buoys are checked weekly with … (AI summary)
Response (Avon and Somerset Police): • The Constabulary will co-locate Call Handlers and Dispatchers from April 2015 to operate as a unified team under single supervision. • A new THRIVE call grading matrix is being … (AI summary)
Overdue
Andrew Peacock
Concerns: The tractor involved in the collision did not display an amber warning beacon, which current regulations do not require on all roads. The coroner suggests considering whether the use of such beacons should apply to vehicles on all roads to enhance visibility and collision avoidance.
Response (Department for Transport): • The Department for Transport reviewed police collision statistics (STATS19) for agricultural vehicles from 2009 to 2013. • The Department for Transport stated that the statistics did not suggest a … (AI summary)
Responded
Joshua Booth
Concerns: The coroner identified that a subsided section of road was substandard and dangerous, requiring immediate repair and appropriate warning signage with an advisory speed limit. Further, dangerous posts at the roadside necessitated the erection of an Armco barrier.
Response (Lincolnshire County Council): • The subsided road section was levelled with bituminous material. • Temporary signage advising of an uneven road surface was erected and left in place. • An advisory speed limit … (AI summary)
Responded
James McGeown
Concerns: The coroner noted an undulation in the road surface that likely caused a vehicle to lose control, particularly at higher speeds, posing a risk of collision for drivers.
Overdue
Kenneth McCurdy and Mary McCurdy
Concerns: The coroner noted the absence of signage at a gap in the central reservation to indicate that it is no entry for eastbound vehicles or to prohibit U-turns and right turns for eastbound vehicles.
Response (National Highways): • Highways England proposed measures to enhance existing facilities at the central reservation gap, including signing and road markings. • Highways England stated it would work with Durham Constabulary to … (AI summary)
Responded
Charles Rayner
Concerns: The crossover point for westbound traffic lacks a slip road or deceleration lane, requiring vehicles to reduce speed significantly in the outside lane. There is also no signage prohibiting a right turn at this location.
Overdue
Erich Speilmann
Concerns: The coroner raises concerns that the quality of street lighting at the incident location may have contributed to the incident.
Overdue
Neil Garry
Concerns: The coroner noted the absence of a pedestrian crossing at Ramshead Approach in Leeds, on a busy road (A6120) frequently used by pedestrians, including children.
Response (Leeds City Council): • Leeds City Council has concluded design considerations and confirmed a final layout for pedestrian assisted facilities at the junction. • A report will be presented to the Chief Officer … (AI summary)
Responded
Aleeza Ahmed
Concerns: The coroner noted concerns that the chamfered kerb design may have contributed to the vehicle overturning, and the absence of a protective barrier on the central reservation could have altered the vehicle's trajectory.
Response (Stockport Borough Council): • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC) included the possible installation of a central barrier on Crookilley Way in a list of potential improvements submitted to Transport for Greater Manchester in … (AI summary)
Responded
Robert Walker
Concerns: The coroner noted insufficient deviation markings on a road bend, a tree trunk near the carriageway that posed a danger to cyclists, and a slippery path surface that could cause walkers to slip into the road.
Overdue
Margaret Challis
Concerns: The coroner noted a challenging stretch of the A470 road, with a history of serious collisions, and identified the need for an advanced warning sign for an approaching left bend to mitigate future risks.
Overdue
Alesha O’Connor
Concerns: An advanced warning sign for a challenging left bend on the A470 is absent, and a forensic collision investigator indicated such a sign would reduce the risk of future collisions.
Overdue
Corey Price
Concerns: The A470, a challenging road with a history of serious collisions, lacks an advanced warning sign for an approaching left bend, which the coroner recorded would assist motorists in reducing risk.
Overdue
Keith Harper
Concerns: Drivers exiting the roundabout have no prior warning of the pedestrian/cycle crossing due to limited visibility and misleading features, with a review of warning signs and design recommended. Carriageway markings exiting the roundabout are also obscured by resurfacing work and debris, requiring attention.
Response (Essex County Council): • Essex County Council confirmed that the refreshing of segregated cycle facility lining and edge of carriageway markings had been completed. (AI summary)
Responded
Michael Jopson
Concerns: The coroner expressed concern that the A66, a busy arterial route with sections of winding country road, should be a dual carriageway throughout to prevent future head-on collisions and avoidable deaths.
Response (Department of Transport): • Works to introduce a right turn lane at A66 Brougham were completed in April. • Average speed cameras are to be installed at A66 Kirkby Thore by mid-July, and … (AI summary)
Responded
Tony Jopson and Michael Jopson
Concerns: The coroner noted the A66 includes single carriageway sections where fatal head-on collisions occurred. The report states the road should be dual carriageway throughout to prevent avoidable deaths.
Response (Department of Transport): • The Department for Transport commissioned the Northern Trans Pennine study to examine the case for dualling the A66 and A69, with findings expected in autumn 2016. • The Chancellor … (AI summary)
Responded
Harold Davies
Concerns: Concerns include multiple fatalities at a road junction since 2010, with proposed safety work lacking funding approval or a start date. The coroner also notes concerns about the speed limit and warning signs on Station Road.
Response (National Highways): • National Highways cleared vegetation around the Station Road junction to improve visibility. • National Highways is seeking funding for a designed accident remedial scheme, escalating the request to senior … (AI summary)
Response (A One): • A-one+ made recommendations to Highways England regarding junction safety improvements. • A-one+ agreed to a meeting with Nottinghamshire Police, Nottinghamshire County Council, and Highways England. • A-one+ stated it … (AI summary)
Response (Nottinghamshire County Council): • The council stated it had not carried out investigations into the incidents, noting the Trunk Road is the responsibility of Highways England. • The council indicated it would co-operate … (AI summary)
Responded
Beverley Siddall
Concerns: The coroner noted concerns regarding the adequacy of the road layout, safety notices, and/or barriers on the A3075 road at Cottage, Perranwell, where multiple vehicles, including Mr Siddall's, had left the road. A review of this section is recommended to reduce the risk of further incidents.
Response (Cornwall Council): • The Council investigated the circumstances of the incident and reviewed accident data for the site. • The Council stated it does not believe it is suitable to introduce solid … (AI summary)
Responded
Jonathan Sellman
Concerns: The coroner raised concerns regarding water pooling on a busy road and the state of the verges, which could potentially cause vehicles leaving the road to be pushed over safety barriers.
Response (Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council): • The Council commissioned an independent inspection and undertook extensive surveying of the highway drainage system at the accident location. • The Council implemented a system where a highway inspector … (AI summary)
Responded
David Holman
Concerns: The coroner noted the absence of a cycle lane, an obstruction on the footpath from a road sign support, and an unexplained dip in the kerb edge, all of which may have contributed to a cyclist leaving the footpath.
Response (Cheshire East Council): • The council stated that works are programmed to remove and relocate a road sign assembly from the footway. • The council stated that works are programmed to re-kerb the … (AI summary)
Responded
Warren Myers
Concerns: The coroner noted that warning signage on the approach to a particular corner was inadequate.
Response (Durham County Council): • Bend ahead warning signs were increased in size from 600mm to 750mm high. • An additional chevron sign was erected, and 10 hazard marker posts were installed around the … (AI summary)
Responded
Philip Evanson
Concerns: The coroner noted that road markings on the A49 Tarporley Road, including a 'ghost' island, lane dividing lines, and right turn arrows, were significantly worn and indistinct.
Overdue
Paul Briggs
Concerns: The coroner identified that adding rumble strips to the existing double white lines could reduce the risk of vehicles inadvertently straying into oncoming lanes. Concerns were also raised regarding the completion timeframe for risk assessments and remedial actions following the incident.
Response (Merseyside Passenger Transport Authority): • The authority confirmed it would include rumble strips within the white lines in the area concerned. • It proposed to engage a suitable contractor by 5 May 2017. • … (AI summary)
Responded
Milan Dokic
Concerns: The coroner raises concerns that reduced grip road surfaces on the Cycle Super Highway and at junctions pose a hazard for road users, particularly cyclists. An urgent review of these surfaces and their replacement with higher grip alternatives is recommended.
Overdue
Esther Hartsilver
Concerns: The design of the Denmark Hill with Orpheus Street junction allows left turns from lane 2 to conflict with straight-ahead traffic. Issues include the lack of road surface warnings and the high volume of bus traffic.
Response (Southwark Council): • Southwark Council implemented interim safety improvements at the junction on 21 March 2017. • These interim measures included painting cycle symbol markings, removing a bus lane line, and installing … (AI summary)
Response (Transport for London): • Transport for London (TfL) attended site visits and meetings with Southwark and the Metropolitan Police, which led to Southwark implementing short-term changes at the Orpheus Street junction. • TfL … (AI summary)
Overdue
Margaret Jones
Concerns: The coroner noted a history of collisions at the A36/Branch Road junction and recommended reducing the speed limit on the A36. Concerns also included the need to review and improve road signs and carriageway markings to warn drivers of junction risks, along with repairing the high friction surface.
Response (National Highways): • The organisation stated that reducing the speed limit on the A36 would be inappropriate and unlikely to have a positive effect, citing the road's strategic function and the incident's … (AI summary)
Overdue
Rebecca Shaw
Concerns: The coroner raised concerns regarding obstructed views for oncoming traffic due to a road sign and trees at a bend, and the lack of a sufficiently wide central reservation at the location, impacting road safety.
Overdue
Ralph Brazier
Concerns: Surrey County Council insufficiently considers the increasing number of cyclists on highways for defect categorisation, prioritising cycle lanes over general highways used by many cyclists, and does not specifically account for risks to cyclists during assessments.
Response (Surrey County Council): • Surrey County Council has begun a review of its highway policy in accordance with the October 2016 revision of the national Code of Practice. • The review will consider … (AI summary)
Responded
Roy Lynch
Concerns: The coroner noted the short reaction time available for drivers to avoid a stationary vehicle at 60mph. Concerns were raised regarding the lack of restrictions on stopping vehicles at that specific location, despite a safer parking area nearby.
Overdue
Aston Soulsby
Concerns: The coroner noted that pedestrians frequently wait in the hatched road area and vehicles pass parked vehicles there, leading to confusion and posing a risk for both pedestrians and motorists.
Response (Sandwell Metrolitan Borough Council): • Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council carried out a road safety investigation, which included a 12-hour pedestrian count and site visits. • The council stated it is considering the possibility of … (AI summary)
Responded
Jeffery Matthews
Concerns: Concerns were raised regarding inadequate warning signage and restricted visibility of a crossroads junction due to high hedgerows. Previously recommended modifications by Capita, which were not implemented, should be reconsidered to minimise future incident risks.
Response (Jeffrey Matthews): • Local landowners reduced vegetation. • The highways department immediately improved white lining. • A scheme for high friction surfacing, improved road marking, and signage is currently under consultation and … (AI summary)
Responded
Select committee recommendations(7)
#15 —
Recommendation: An e-scooter travelling on a pavement at a speed of up to 15.5 mph is a serious hazard both for the user and pedestrians. Local authorities need plans in place to monitor and discourage pavement use during rental trials in …
Response attribution not verified
#14 —
Recommendation: We understand that it may not always be practical or feasible for users of rental e-scooters to obtain and wear a helmet. It is important, however, that e-scooter operators involved with the trials encourage users to wear helmets, and where …
Response attribution not verified
#13 —
Recommendation: The Department must use the data gathered during the rental trials, in addition to qualitative and quantitative evidence from other countries, to determine which e-scooter design requirements are appropriate and necessary from a safety perspective. This exercise will help inform …
Response attribution not verified
#12 —
Recommendation: In its Response to this Report, the Department should clarify what principles it expects local authorities to follow when determining e-scooter speed limits in certain areas.
Response attribution not verified
#11 —
Recommendation: In our view, the speed of e-scooters should be suitable for the local environment they are deployed in. A “one size fits all” approach will not work. Speed limits in the trials can be determined at the local level by …
Response attribution not verified
#10 —
Recommendation: The Department should closely monitor the number and type of collisions that occur during the e-scooter rental trials to determine the future insurance requirements for both rental and privately-owned e-scooters, should the latter be legalised. (Paragraph 59) Safety risks and …
Response attribution not verified
#9 —
Recommendation: There are mixed views by stakeholders on whether, in the longer-term, there should be a mandatory requirement for e-scooter riders to have insurance, either for rental schemes or for privately owned vehicles. In our view, an e-scooter is more akin …
Response attribution not verified
LGO / SPSO decisions(190)
22-001-235 — West Northamptonshire Council
Summary: We stopped investigating a complaint about a failure to clear a path and prune trees because the Council took suitable action during the investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Not Upheld
May 2022
22-007-403 — Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged due to the Council’s failure to maintain roads it is responsible for. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Sep 2022
23-012-472 — Surrey County Council
Summary: Mr X complained about the replacement vehicle crossover the Council installed across the driveway of his home. He said the new crossover is narrower, with higher edges. There was no fault in the Council’s actions.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Not Upheld
Mar 2024
24-008-974 — London Borough of Bromley
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that he suffered injuries after tripping on a Council pavement. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Sep 2024
24-003-024 — Lancashire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
May 2025
24-022-336 — Leicester City Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s response to a report of footpath defect. It’s unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s actions if we were to investigate. And in any case, we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is looking for.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
May 2025
24-021-703 — Derbyshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr Y is seeking.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
May 2025
25-005-470 — Wiltshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint from 2023 about the safety of a pedestrian refuge island. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to exercise discretion.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Sep 2025
25-008-692 — Eastleigh Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council decided to install barriers at the entrance to a country park. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Nov 2025
24-014-045 — Manchester City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because the courts are better placed to consider the complaint.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Dec 2024
24-013-295 — Cumberland Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway repair and maintenance because the court is better placed to consider the complaint.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Dec 2024
24-015-946 — Leicestershire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s dissatisfaction with the Council’s response to his insurance claim. This is because it does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to go to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Dec 2024
PSOW-202404035 — Transport for Wales
Mrs A complained because she was unhappy that Transport for Wales had failed to address the concerns raised in her letter in May 2024. The Ombudsman found that the body had provided a response in July 2024, but the response did not sufficiently address Mrs A’s concerns. The Ombudsman sought …
PSOW (Public Services Om…
Oct 2024
21-015-351 — Essex County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the road outside his home is uneven causing pooling of water when it rains and passing traffic to drench his driveway. There is insufficient evidence of Council fault in its decision that the condition of the road is not a priority …
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Feb 2022
21-016-557 — West Northamptonshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs C’s complaint that her car was damaged due to the Council’s failure to repair a pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs C to pursue her compensation claim at court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Feb 2022
21-016-574 — Essex County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council charging him to replace an advisory ‘H-Bar’ marking outside his house. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Mar 2022
21-015-274 — West Berkshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance in his area. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. It is reasonable for him to submit a claim for any personal injury which he sustains as a result of negligence by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Mar 2022
21-011-016 — Kent County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council made a traffic regulation order reducing the speed limit on a section of road. Mr X had a legal remedy at court which it was reasonable for him to use if he wished to challenge the order.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Mar 2022
22-007-966 — Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that she tripped and suffered injuries due to the Council’s failure to repair a pavement defect. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to pursue her compensation claim at court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Sep 2022
22-007-887 — Hertfordshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged after hitting a pothole which the Council failed to repair. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Sep 2022
22-007-580 — North Yorkshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint the Council’s highway sign caused damage to his vehicle. It is reasonable for Mr Y to use his legal remedy at court to pursue such a claim.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Sep 2022
24-002-875 — Derbyshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage caused to Miss X’s vehicle by a pothole. It is reasonable for Miss X to refer the matter to the small claims court as it is really a negligence claim for compensation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Jun 2024
24-002-072 — Cheshire East Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about highway repair. It is reasonable for Mr X to pursue the matter through the courts.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Jun 2024
24-005-171 — Staffordshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that her car was damaged due to the Council’s failure to repair a pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Miss B to pursue her claim at court. An investigation solely into the Council’s delay deciding the claim is not justified.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Jul 2024
24-003-283 — London Borough of Lambeth
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council’s failure to maintain road markings caused the complainant to sustain injuries in an accident. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to use the alternative court remedies which are available.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Jul 2024
24-005-656 — Birmingham City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about personal injury because of poorly maintained footpaths. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The matters are best dealt with by the courts.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Aug 2024
24-005-212 — Surrey County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaints that the Council refuses to take action over cars parked on the verge outside his property, has not maintained the verge and will not pay for damage caused by the parked cars to his fence. There is not enough evidence of fault …
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Aug 2024
24-008-554 — Leicestershire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate this claim for personal injuries. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect the complaint to go to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Aug 2024
24-008-628 — Cheshire West & Chester Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that her car was damaged after hitting a pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Miss B to pursue her compensation claim at court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Aug 2024
24-008-584 — London Borough of Lambeth
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a maintenance issue concerning the pavement outside her home. This is because she has made a personal injury claim to the Council and if she is not happy with its response to the claim it would be reasonable for her to …
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Sep 2024
24-002-445 — Devon County Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Sep 2024
23-011-917 — Wiltshire Council
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to keep its list of streets up to date and correct. We find the Council at fault for not making a timely decision on whether to update its list of streets. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and provide him …
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Upheld
Sep 2024
24-008-372 — Trafford Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because it is a complaint about negligence which is a legal matter for the courts to consider and decide.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Oct 2024
24-021-659 — Surrey County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint that a footpath laid by the Council has resulted in water damage to his home. This is because it is reasonable for Mr C to put in a compensation claim, and if needed, take the Council to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Mar 2025
24-018-948 — Surrey County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council deciding not to do repair works to the path and verge outside her house. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to warrant us investigating. We also cannot achieve the outcome Miss X wants.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Mar 2025
24-018-934 — Derbyshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s replacement of speed limit signs, because any injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Mar 2025
24-018-952 — Devon County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about highway maintenance. The courts are better placed to consider it.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Apr 2025
24-020-703 — Staffordshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that she suffered personal injury because she said the Council failed to grit a public path. This is because Miss X could submit a claim against the Council’s insurers and, if the claim is rejected, ultimately take the matter to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Apr 2025
24-014-291 — Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council does not take enforcement action against pavement parking. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Apr 2025
25-001-361 — Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because the courts and insurers are better placed to consider the complaint.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Jul 2025
25-003-171 — Kingston Upon Hull City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because the courts are better placed to consider the matter.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Jul 2025
25-010-026 — Hampshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that his car was damaged by a pothole which the Council had failed to repair. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to take the Council to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Oct 2025
25-009-588 — Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council failing to maintain a road where he lives. It is reasonable for Mr X to apply to court for an order requiring the Council to repair the road.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Oct 2025
25-014-976 — Worcestershire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his property has been damaged by Council-owned trees. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Oct 2025
25-001-020 — East Sussex County Council
Summary: There was no fault in the Council’s decision not to take further action and undertake remedial works around Mrs X’s report of water flooding on her street. The Council was at fault for delays in carrying out site inspections and for failing to inform her of its decision not …
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Upheld
Nov 2025
25-012-201 — Brighton & Hove City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to Mr X’s tyre from hitting a pothole in the road. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to pursue his claim for repair costs through the courts.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Nov 2025
25-017-279 — North Northamptonshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged by loose road chippings. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Nov 2025
25-016-718 — Torbay Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that her car was damaged by a pothole. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs X to pursue the matter at court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Nov 2025
25-008-474 — Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to accept responsibility for maintenance of a wall adjacent to the public highway. This is a private boundary dispute and we cannot determine legal ownership of land. The courts are better placed to decide civil disputes.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Nov 2025
25-009-694 — Milton Keynes Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a delay in replacing gully covers or her complaint that her car was damaged. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions and it is reasonable for Miss X to take a claim for damages …
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Nov 2025