The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the safety of the Council’s temporary traffic light set up. This is because the Council’s actions did not cause Mr X significant injustice.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council failed to manage a temporary traffic light set up. He says this led to unsafe traffic conditions, delays and personal frustration.
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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X.
I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
I acknowledge Mr X found the situation frustrating and was concerned about safety. However, I do not consider the impact on him to be significant enough to warrant an investigation. The Council investigated and responded to his concerns and took action it considered necessary to correct the issue.
The traffic lights were a temporary measure and I do not consider there is enough evidence of an ongoing safety risk to the public to justify our further involvement.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman