The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr D complains about the signage at a bus gate. We have ended the investigation because there are other bodies better placed to consider the complaint and there is no personal injustice to Mr D.
The complaint
The complainant (whom I refer to as Mr D) says the signage and road markings for a bus gate are unclear and inadequate.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide: any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered the Mr D provided. I asked the Council questions and examined the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (amended) and the Traffic Signs Manual, Regulatory Signs 2019 which is government guidance.
I shared my draft decision with both parties.
What I found
Mr D complained to the Council about signage and road markings for a bus gate. The Council responded in January 2024 that it considered the signage and markings to be adequate and in line with the Traffic Signs Manual. It subsequently advised Mr D that if he had received a penalty for using the bus gate he had a right of appeal to the parking adjudicator. Mr D told the Council he had chosen to pay the penalty so he could pursue a complaint at his own pace.
I intend to discontinue our investigation of this case. That is because the crux of Mr D’s complaint is a challenge about the signage and road markings for a bus gate. It is not for the Ombudsman to determine whether a sign or marking is valid. As set out in chapter three of the Traffic Signs Manual the “definitive legal interpretation…. remains the prerogative of the courts or parking adjudicators in relation to the appearance and use of specific traffic signs, road markings, etc. at specific locations”. There are other bodies better placed to consider the points raised by Mr D. In addition, I do not see there is sufficient possible injustice to warrant further consideration of the complaint. Mr D says the route may be unsafe and refers to the potential for an accident and the number of bus lane fines issued to motorists. Whilst I appreciate, he is concerned about that an accident might happen we cannot look to resolve a hypothetical injustice. In addition, if he feels the route resulted in a bus lane fine, he had the right to appeal to a parking adjudicator.
Final decision
I have ended the investigation.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman