Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because it is late without good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has failed to act in response to a report of a highways risk in 2021, relating to water freezing on a highway bend in his area.
2. Mr Y says he has worried for several years about the safety of the road, especially in cold weather.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
6. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The law says people should normally complain to us within 12 months of becoming aware of an issue. Complaints brought to the Ombudsman more than 12 months after someone becomes aware of something a council has done are considered late. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons.
9. Mr Y’s was aware of his reason to complain about the Council’s lack of action in the time after he originally complained about the road conditions in 2021, more than 12 months ago. Consequently, the complaint is now late. We have discretion to disapply the rule outlined in paragraph four where we decide there are good reasons. Mr Y has not provided any good reasons why he did not bring the complaint to us within 12 months of knowing about the matter. It is reasonable to expect him to have complained sooner.
10. Mr Y has also said the Council has assessed the issue as being only a medium risk in 2023. Mr Y disagrees with this and believes the risk should be considered higher due to the risk of the water freezing. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached.
11. In this case, the Council made its decision on the priority assessment based on relevant factors, including the road speed, elements of the flooding issue and safety in accordance with its policy. Consequently, as the decision has been made properly, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, even though Mr Y disagrees with the outcome. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is late without good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman