Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking restrictions. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has refused her request to implement parking restrictions on the street behind her house. She says parked cars regularly obstruct the access to her property, causing inconvenience and distress. She wants the Council to agree to her request for parking restrictions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))

3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council is the Highway Authority and it has powers to introduce Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) through the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. A TRO allows councils to regulate the speed, movement and parking of vehicles.
7. Ms X asked the Council to implement parking restrictions in the road behind her house. The Council considered her request as part of a TRO consultation process.
8. In its response to Ms X’s complaint, the Council set out how it had considered her request. It said its officers had consulted with residents, ward councillors and emergency services as part of the process. At the committee meeting, councillors had considered information presented in the officer’s report, which included her comments. It also considered objections it had received to the proposal. Having considered all the information, it had decided not to agree the request.
9. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council appropriate considered the proposal and Ms X’s comments but decided not to agree the request. Although Ms X disagrees with its decision, it appropriately considered her views as part of the decision-making process. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision and so we cannot question the decision made.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman