Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to plan and coordinate roadworks in his area which led to multiple closures and temporary traffic lights in the same area. I ended this investigation as there was insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to plan and coordinate roadworks in his area which led to multiple road closures and temporary traffic lights in the same area.
2. Mr X said the roadworks caused significantly longer journey times, affected his business and meant he missed personal appointments. Mr X said he wanted compensation for the effect the roadworks had on his business and due to missing personal appointments.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered Mr X’s complaint and information he provided.
5. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiry letter.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Statutory undertakers

7. Statutory undertakers are various companies and bodies which have a general licence under The New Road and Street Works Act 1991 (the Act) to carry out certain development and works on the highway. These bodies include electric, gas, water and some telecom companies.
8. The council/highways authority cannot prevent statutory undertakes from carrying out these works. The role of the council when statutory undertakers carry out works is to minimise disruption to the road network by co-ordinating roadworks where possible and ensuring public safety.
9. It is the responsibility of the statutory undertaker to present the council with a traffic management plan which takes in account the planned works. The Act says a council shall ‘use its best endeavours to coordinate the execution of works in the interests of safety and to minimise the inconvenience to persons using the street’.

Temporary Traffic Regulation Orders (TTRO)

10. A TTRO is for temporary restrictions on a road such as a closure, partial closure or the use of traffic lights to allow road works or for safety reasons such as when a sporting or social event is taking place. Applications for a TTRO are made to the Council.
11. The Council’s website explains that the Secretary of state has issued blanket agreement for all statutory undertakers to be able to place 2-way temporary traffic lights on a highway when notice is given to the Council’s street manager. All other TTROs must go through a full application process.
12. The Council uses Department for Transport conditions when approving TTROs and cannot refuse an application just because it may cause some disruption. The Council says it does check timings of works, duration and location prior to approving applications.

What happened

13. During the summer of 2023 a utility company carried out works in Mr X’s area in various locations. This involved roadworks which included road closures and temporary traffic lights in a condensed area.
14. Mr X wrote to his local councillor in August 2023 to express his frustration with the roadworks. He said the Council had failed to properly coordinate roadworks which was causing significant delays on all routes he used. He said a typical journey which should take a few minutes was taking in excess of 35 minutes due to the sheer amount of roadworks and temporary traffic lights. He said some roadworks were in place for weeks with no progress. The councillor forwarded Mr X’s complaint to the Council.
15. The Council responded and said some of the road closures were approved in error but have since been resolved. It said the works were unavoidable, but all routes were planned and diversions checked before it approved any TTROs. The Council said it had a duty to allow utility companies to work on the highway and disruption was unavoidable. The Council said it was monitoring performance of the utility company. It said Mr X should raise complaints about the utility company directly with the company themselves.
16. Mr X remained unhappy and complained to us. He said the Council was failing in its duty to properly coordinate the roadworks.

My findings

17. In response to my enquiry letter the Council has explained that it approves TTROs for statutory undertakers against a national checklist and cannot refuse works just because it may cause disruption. It has provided evidence of all TTROs it has received from the utility company specific to Mr X’s complaint of which 18% were refused. It explained the error referred to in paragraph 15 was resolved quickly and happened due to a mistake by a member of staff who has now received further training. The Council also monitors performance and has issued fixed penalty fines to the utility company where works have taken too long.
18. I decided to end this investigation as there is insufficient evidence of Council fault and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome or achieve the levels of compensation Mr X desires. Statutory undertakers are allowed to work on the highway by law and there is no evidence of fault in either how the Council approved the TTROs or in its efforts to manage traffic. While roadworks and restrictions cause a certain degree of frustration to road users, they are temporary in nature. That frustration is not significant enough to warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I ended this investigation as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman