Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s provision of information about the locations of school streets in its area. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to provide a map showing the locations of school streets which has caused her inconvenience in navigating her area because of the restrictions to drivers posed by these streets. She says as a disabled driver this is particularly difficult for her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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

3. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X says she has difficulty driving around her area because the Council has introduced school streets in various locations which restrict access at certain times. she says this means she has to change her routes and it wastes a lot of her time as a disabled driver. She asked the Council for a map indicating the streets and also suggested that it provides diversion signs.
6. The Council told her it does not have a map but it provided her with a list of the streets where these regulations apply. As highway authority the Council has no duty to provide maps for route planning. This is a basic requirement of drivers as part of the UK driving test. It cannot provide additional diversion signs because the street regulations are permanent and temporary diversions would cause confusion for drivers.
7. The Council told Ms X that if she believes the location of the streets is causing any accessibility problems she should make a separate complaint to its accessibility unit but it believes the streets are compliant with the requirements.
8. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
9. In this case the Council has explained why it does not produce maps for individual route planning and how Ms X may raise the matters as an accessibility issue.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s provision of information about the locations of school streets in its area. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman