The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s introduction of a Traffic Regulation order to change the traffic layout in a town centre. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the Council’s introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) in the town where he lives. He says local resident’s views expressed in consultation were ignored and the scheme to alter traffic flow in the town centre has resulted in a decline in businesses.
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 the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
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 introduced a Traffic Regulation Order to confirm traffic flow changes in his local town centre. He says the Order, which is part of a development scheme funded by the County and District Councils has failed to improve traffic, parking and shopping in the town and has had a negative effect on local business.
Mr X complained to the Council because he felt that it ignored the feedback from local residents. He said that 54 of 62 residents who commented during the public consultation were opposed to the order but the Council decided to make it regardless of their views.
The Council is the highway authority and it has powers to introduce TROs through the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The regulations and guidance to the Act require a highway authority to notify statutory consultees such as emergency services and transport operators of the proposals. There is no requirement to carry out public consultation but the authority must advertise the order in the local press. In this case the Council notified residents on its website and invited comments by April 2022. Although a highway authority is expected to consider any public comments, the decision whether or not to implement the order is for it to decide.
TROs are often controversial in the area where they are applied and may be unpopular with residents of a specific location. If the highway authority believes the changes in the traffic regulations imposed by the order are for the greater benefit of traffic management, then it may confirm the order. In this case a previous Temporary Traffic Regulation Order was in place and the Council decided to make a permanent order as part of the town centre scheme.
When considering complaints, we may not question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Councils’ officers or members. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions.
In this case the Council followed the proper procedure and explained to Mr X why it had decided to confirm the Order.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order to change the traffic layout in a town centre. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman