Inadequate Road Safety Barriers
Use of temporary or inadequate road barriers that provide insufficient resistance in a collision, risking serious injury or death.
310 items
3 sources
Source spread
Where this theme appears
Inadequate Road Safety Barriers has been flagged across 3 independent accountability sources:
119 PFD reports
1 IOPC rec
190 LGO/SPSO decisions
When the same issue appears across inquiries, coroner reports, and regulators independently, it indicates a recurring issue across the public record.
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.
PFD Reports (119) — showing 50 strongest matches
David Cox
Concerns: The narrow bridleway with acute, blind bends and no safety barrier poses a significant risk of vehicles leaving the track and falling into the river below.
Response: The Authority installed further permanent signage at both ends of the track in December 2013. They are investigating possible funding streams to implement further measures.
Responded
Mustafa Cicek
Concerns: Highway safety issues include a collision black spot with inadequate warning signage and a potentially hazardous eucalyptus sapling. "SLOW" warnings are also needed on the carriageway approach.
Response (National Highways): The Highways Agency has installed 'SLOW' road markings and removed a eucalyptus tree. It is also increasing the number of chevrons on the bend and ensuring they are on yellow …
Overdue
Paul Rogerson
Concerns: River safety equipment is inadequate, poorly maintained, and lacks proper warning signs. Gaps exist in police river rescue training, inter-agency communication, and hypothermia first aid, compounded by insufficient equipment checks.
Overdue
Michael Telford
Overdue
Mark Burgess
Concerns: The M65 motorway's decommissioned lighting system meant drivers could not see debris in the unlit carriageway, directly causing multiple subsequent collisions and injuries.
Overdue
Carl Morris
Response (PADI Europe): PADI will include an additional statement in the 'Learning Agreement' to further enforce the issue of medical illness to both the Instructor and student diver with regards to doctor's approval …
Responded
Janette Sutherland
Concerns: A drainage channel and concrete headwall present a significant hazard to road users. A safety barrier is needed to prevent vehicles from impacting the headwall.
Response (Caerphilly County Council): The council will investigate the site of the incident to provide recommendations for measures to alleviate future incidents. A Road Restraint Risk Assessment Process (RRRAP) survey was carried out on …
Response (Caerphilly County Council): Following a Road Restraint Risk Assessment Process (RRRAP), the council will demolish a headwall and re-profile the surrounding ditch, with works programmed for commencement in July.
Responded
Sean Morley
Concerns: The A444 stretch lacks pedestrian/cyclist warning signs, street lighting, and protective barriers, despite regular use by vulnerable road users and a 70mph speed limit, creating a high risk of collisions.
Overdue
Russell Long
Response (Cumbria County Council): Works were carried out in the last month to raise the height to a consistent level with the top of the bridge and installation of edge restraint system on the …
Responded
Francis Golding
Concerns: The junction design poses significant and repeatedly fatal risks to cyclists due to collisions with left-turning vehicles and inadequate space, with slow progress on promised safety improvements.
Response (Camden Council): Camden Council will issue a brief to traffic consultants by the end of May 2014 to invite tenders for traffic signal modelling in the Holborn area, including the Southampton Row/Vernon …
Responded
Yasmin Richards
Concerns: The A46 "Hartley Bends" has an inappropriate speed limit and inadequate road signage, markings, and warning features, contributing to a high risk of fatal collisions.
Response (Highway Agency): The Highways Agency has implemented local measures to highlight the nature of the road, including additional chevron signage, hazard warning signs, and high friction surfacing in strips. They are planning …
Responded
Anthony Ponting
Response (Network Rail): • The vegetation growth was cut back during the first week of August 2013. • Vegetation will continue to be routinely checked at six-monthly inspections. • The SLL sign on …
Responded
Gavin Bradley, Mark Thorpe and Darren Thorpe
Concerns: Unsafe weir design lacks specific channels for kayaks and suitable upstream landing areas, coupled with insufficient warnings, risking water users' safety.
Overdue
Kai Lambe
Concerns: Inadequate safety measures and insufficient warning signage at a dangerous weir and salmon chute put children playing in the area at significant risk.
Overdue
Alan Evans
Concerns: The road layout with obscured views and permitted overtaking, combined with protruding "old style cats eyes," creates a significant highway safety risk requiring double white lines and slim-line catseye replacement.
Overdue
Dolores Hubbert
Concerns: Concerns were raised about the overall safety of a junction, specifically regarding speed restrictions and the frequency of grass cutting which could obscure driver visibility.
Response (Sunderland City Council): The Council will undertake an assessment of possible measures for the A690/Durham Road, East Rainton junction in 2015. It intends to commence the statutory process to reduce the speed limit …
Responded
Marcus Szigetvari
Concerns: The busy road during rush hour presented a high risk of drivers misjudging motorcycle headlights for distant cars, especially in poor conditions, contributing to a history of multiple collisions and fatalities.
Response (Highways Streetcare Services): The Council argues that the junction complies with modern design standards and the layout was not a contributory factor in the collision. They state that poor weather conditions, the speed …
Responded
Leanne Gower
Concerns: Police do not routinely share damage-only collision data with councils, hindering effective identification of hazardous road sections and informed highway maintenance decisions.
Response (Northamptonshire County Council): Northamptonshire County Council states that the Department for Transport Design Manual is outside of their remit to review. They detail changes to the road network and skidding resistance policy, and …
Response (Northamptonshire Police): Northamptonshire Police will highlight concerns about collision locations to a small group of road safety problem solvers, briefing them on the specific incident and asking them to informally report any …
Overdue
Kevin Lawrenson
Concerns: Numerous accidents occurred due to inadequate and poorly visible signage for slow-moving vehicles. Improvements such as larger signs, lane separation, or electronic warnings are needed at this location.
Response (National Highways): National Highways has instructed UK Highways M4O Limited to improve signing on the southbound approach to the Stokenchurch Cutting, including an additional 'Slow Moving Lorries' sign, raised sign height, and …
Responded
Christopher Taylor
Concerns: The dispatch team lacked immediate visibility of incoming incidents, hindering timely action. Also, the landowner of a high-risk river stretch should consider providing vandal-proof life buoy stations.
Response (Sainsburys Supermarkets Limited): Sainsbury's met with local council and fire services, cleared vegetation to improve visibility and access, and maintains service level agreements. They also endorsed RoSPA's recommendation for user education and prioritize …
Response (Avon and Somerset Police): Avon and Somerset Constabulary outlines changes to their communication services, including a new call scripting system with dynamic assessment capabilities to be adopted in April 2015. They have also established …
Overdue
Andrew Peacock
Concerns: The absence of regulations requiring amber warning beacons on tractors on all roads, not just dual carriageways, may reduce visibility and increase collision risk for other road users.
Response (Department for Transport): The Department for Transport acknowledges the coroner's concerns regarding amber warning beacons on agricultural vehicles but states that current data does not support making them mandatory. They highlight existing initiatives …
Responded
Joshua Booth
Concerns: A seriously substandard, subsided road section poses an immediate danger to motorists, requiring urgent repair, warning signage, and an advisory speed limit. Dangerous posts at the bank's foot also necessitate an Armco barrier.
Response (Lincolnshire County Council): Lincolnshire County Council reports that the section of road identified as having subsidence has now been levelled. Temporary signage advising of the uneven road surface has been left in place …
Responded
James McGeown
Concerns: An undulation in the road surface caused a loss of vehicle control at higher speeds, posing a significant risk to unsuspecting drivers.
Overdue
Kenneth McCurdy and Mary McCurdy
Concerns: The absence of clear signage at a central reservation gap fails to indicate prohibited right turns or U-turns for east-bound vehicles, creating a significant highway safety risk.
Response (National Highways): Highways England will work with Durham Constabulary to investigate enhancements to signing and road markings on the A66 by March 2016. They will also place a bid for funding to …
Responded
Charles Rayner
Concerns: The report identifies that the crossover point lacks a deceleration lane and there is no prohibition on right turns with appropriate signage.
Overdue
Erich Speilmann
Concerns: The quality of street lighting at the incident location was poor and may have contributed to the event.
Overdue
Neil Garry
Concerns: A busy road frequently used by pedestrians, including children, lacks a pedestrian crossing, posing a significant safety risk.
Response (Leeds City Council): • A scheme has been designed to provide safe pedestrian assisted facilities across the Ring Road at the Ramshead Approach and Coal Road junction. • A Highways Board report is …
Responded
Aleeza Ahmed
Concerns: Chamfered kerbstones and the absence of a protective Armco barrier on a central reservation were identified as potential factors contributing to a vehicle overturning and posing increased danger to road users.
Response (Stockport Borough Council): Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council plans to make a bid to the Greater Manchester Casualty Reduction Partnership for funding to install a central barrier on Crookilley Way. They are also planning …
Responded
Robert Walker
Concerns: A road bend lacks adequate deviation markings, a tree trunk near the carriageway edge endangers road users, and a path's slippery surface could cause walkers to fall into the road.
Overdue
Margaret Challis
Concerns: An advanced warning sign of the approaching left bend on the A470 would assist in warning motorists of the nature of the road ahead and reduce the risk of similar fatalities.
Overdue
Alesha O’Connor
Concerns: An advanced warning sign of the approaching left bend on the A470 would assist in warning motorists of the nature of the road ahead and reduce the risk of similar fatalities.
Overdue
Corey Price
Concerns: An advanced warning sign of the approaching left bend on the A470 would assist in warning motorists of the nature of the road ahead and reduce the risk of similar fatalities.
Overdue
Keith Harper
Concerns: Drivers lacked adequate warning of a pedestrian crossing near a roundabout due to limited visibility and misleading road features. Additionally, carriageway markings were obscured by resurfacing and debris.
Response (Essex County Council): Essex County Council has completed work to refresh the carriageway markings exiting the roundabout, including the segregation line and give-way triangles.
Responded
Michael Jopson
Concerns: The A66 is a mix of dual carriageway and winding country road, and the coroner suggests that from a road safety perspective the road should be dual carriageway throughout to avoid avoidable deaths.
Responded
Tony Jopson and Michael Jopson
Concerns: The A66's varied road standard, including single carriageway sections, is inadequate for high traffic volumes, particularly HGVs, leading to head-on collisions; it should be dual carriageway throughout.
Response (Department of Transport): The Department of Transport commissioned the Northern Trans Pennine study, covering the A66 and A69 and the Chancellor announced in the 2016 Budget his commitment to upgrade the A66 and …
Responded
Harold Davies
Concerns: A junction has a history of multiple fatalities, but proposed remedial safety works lack funding and commencement dates. There are also concerns about the national speed limit on the approach and insufficient warning signs.
Response (National Highways): Highways England has discussed the coroner's report with relevant parties and is seeking funding for an accident remedial scheme designed by AOne+ involving interactive signs, clearer markings, and improved signage. …
Response (A One): A-one+ acknowledges the coroner's concerns and states that they have made safety recommendations to Highways England regarding the junction. However, they state that it is Highways England's responsibility to secure …
Response (Nottinghamshire County Council): Nottinghamshire County Council acknowledges the coroner's concerns regarding accidents at the A46/Station Road junction but states that the Trunk Road is the responsibility of Highways England, and they defer to …
Responded
Beverley Siddall
Concerns: The road layout, safety notices, and barriers on a specific section of the A3075 are inadequate, posing a persistent risk of vehicles leaving the road.
Response (Cornwall Council): Cornwall Council has investigated the collision and determined that adding safety measures such as crash barriers is unlikely to improve safety and may cause additional injuries; they will continue to …
Responded
Jonathan Sellman
Concerns: Water pooling on a busy road and verges that could propel cars over safety barriers create hazardous driving conditions, despite the drainage being considered operative.
Response (Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council): Rotherham MBC provides detailed information about its road maintenance and inspection regimes, but does not commit to any changes as a result of the coroner's concerns.
Responded
David Holman
Concerns: A lack of dedicated cycle lanes on a busy road, coupled with an obstructed footpath and a hazardous kerb dip, created an unsafe environment for cyclists.
Response (Cheshire East Council): Cheshire East Council has programmed works to remove and relocate a road sign situated in the footway and re-kerb a length of the road to provide a higher consistent kerb …
Responded
Warren Myers
Concerns: Inadequate warning signage on the approach to the corner significantly contributed to the accident risk.
Response (Durham County Council): Durham County Council increased the size of bend ahead warning signs and re-erected a chevron sign. They have an Accident Investigation and Prevention team that investigates every fatal accident.
Responded
Philip Evanson
Concerns: Road markings on the A49 Tarporley Road, specifically the ghost island, lane dividers, and right turn arrows, are significantly worn and indistinct, posing a safety risk.
Overdue
Paul Briggs
Concerns: The absence of rumble strips on double white lines at a merging carriageway increases the risk of vehicles inadvertently straying into oncoming traffic, particularly where visibility is inhibited.
Response (Merseyside Passenger Transport Authority): Merseyside Passenger Transport Authority will engage a contractor to install rumble strips within the white lines in the area concerned, aiming to instruct the contractor by the end of the …
Responded
Milan Dokic
Concerns: The Cycle Superhighway's road surface has reduced grip, creating a significant hazard that increases the likelihood of road users losing control, especially cyclists at junctions. An urgent review and replacement is needed.
Overdue
Esther Hartsilver
Concerns: The junction's design is inherently dangerous, allowing left-turning vehicles to cross straight-ahead traffic and lacking clear road signage to warn users of potential conflict, especially for cyclists.
Response (Southwark Council): Southwark Council plans to introduce two new pelican crossings, relocate the Orpheus Street controlled pedestrian crossing, introduce junction treatment across Orpheus Street, and resurface the Denmark Hill carriageway.
Response (Transport for London): Southwark Council implemented short-term changes to the junction, including new markings and removal of bus lane markings. TfL plans to implement a TLRN scheme including early start signals for cyclists, …
Overdue
Margaret Jones
Concerns: Multiple collisions at a junction highlight the need for a reduced speed limit on the A36, improved road signage, and better carriageway markings to enhance driver safety.
Overdue
Rebecca Shaw
Concerns: The road layout at the junction was unsafe, with obstructed views of oncoming traffic and an inadequate central reservation, increasing the risk of collisions.
Overdue
Ralph Brazier
Concerns: Insufficient consideration of increasing cyclist numbers on highways leads to inadequate defect categorisation, prioritising cycle lanes over highways where many cyclists also face significant risks.
Response (Surrey County Council): Surrey County Council is preparing additional training for highway inspectors in relation to risk assessment for vulnerable users, including cyclists, to be completed by the end of August 2017.
Responded
Roy Lynch
Concerns: The highway design lacked stopping restrictions at a dangerous location, despite a nearby safe parking area, creating an unacceptable risk for drivers encountering stationary vehicles at speed.
Overdue
Aston Soulsby
Concerns: Pedestrians waiting in hatched road areas and vehicles passing in these zones create confusion and significant risk of road traffic incidents.
Response (Sandwell Metrolitan Borough Council): Sandwell MBC is considering installing a formalised crossing point on Crankhall Lane and will alter the outdated carriageway markings, with work planned for completion by 31st March 2018.
Responded
Jeffery Matthews
Concerns: Inadequate warning signage and obstructed visibility at a hazardous crossroads, combined with a failure to implement previously recommended safety improvements due to resource issues, created a significant risk.
Response (Jeffrey Matthews): Funding was allocated to implement recommendations from a 2016 road traffic collision study, including high friction surfacing, improved road marking and signage, which is currently out for consultation. The highways …
Responded
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