The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to flooding at a road junction. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to resolve highway flooding at a junction in a nearby town. He says the flooding is a road safety issue when it occurs and attempts to clear it have not been successful in the long term.
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 cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) 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 or may decide not to continue with 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, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X says the Council has failed to deal with flooding on a busy road junction following periods of heavy rain. He says initially there were no warning signs and traffic avoiding standing water presents a safety hazard. He reported the matter to the Council and made a formal complaint when he was dissatisfied with its response.
The Council told him that it has jetted the gullies when flooding has been reported but this no longer prevents the problem over time. It says initial inspections suggest that the main drain/sewer connection has collapsed and that this would involve major excavations. The road is one of the busiest in its area and will require excavation which will cause traffic disruption when the highway is closed.
The Council says the works will have to be programmed to minimise traffic flow congestion and this will take place in the future. Any flooding in the meantime will involve coning off areas which affect the traffic.
Mr X remains dissatisfied with the Council’s response. As highway authority it is responsible for deciding when major repairs will take place, and this will require the necessary temporary traffic regulation orders to close the road. We may not question the merits of decisions which have been properly made. We do not comment on judgements councils make, unless they are affected by fault in the decision-making process. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to flooding at a road junction. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman