Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a controlled parking zone as part of the complaint is made late and there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice to the complainant.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council placed a parking bay outside his garage, rather than a parking restriction, when it introduced a controlled parking zone. Mr X also complained about a lack of parking enforcement in the area he lives and delay in replacing/fixing parking signs that had been removed/were damaged. Mr X says he has been put to unnecessary expense of paying for a residents’ parking permit and inconvenience in pursuing his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complains the Council did not install a parking restriction adjacent to his garage (yellow lines) when it introduced a controlled parking zone in 2014. Mr X says this is despite the Council’s initial consultation document indicating that this would be done.
8. The law says we should normally only investigate complaints made to us within a year of the person knowing about the problem, unless there are good reasons to investigate now. Mr X has known about this issue for many years and so makes this complaint late to us. Mr X does not explain why he did not come to us sooner and I consider it is reasonable to expect him to have done so and within a year of him knowing about the problem. I do not therefore consider there are good reasons to investigate this late complaint now.
9. Mr X complains the Council gave him the impression it was enforcing illegal parking despite him having reported missing/damaged signs to it. More recently, Mr X says the Council acknowledged that it cannot effectively enforce individual parking bays where signs are missing.
10. Mr X says that as he was told enforcement was ongoing, he paid for parking permits which he now considers he need not have bought.
11. While I recognise Mr X is unhappy as he considers he was wrongly advised, from our perspective, he is not caused an injustice from any Council fault in this regard, that we could remedy. If parking permits are required in the area, this is the case whether enforcement is taking place or not.
12. The Council did acknowledge delay in replacing damaged signs and issues in the way it handled Mr X’s complaints. It has offered Mr X £25 in recognition of this.
13. We will not investigate as I do not consider there is sufficient remaining injustice caused to Mr X from this aspect of his complaint or that we could add to the remedy already offered by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is made late in part and there is insufficient remaining injustice caused to him to warrant our further involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman