Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has wrongly enforced a restriction on the use of a road by motor vehicles. This is because the Council has provided a suitable remedy for the issue and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more. Mr X’s allegations of criminal behaviour and civil liability for damages caused by the Council’s actions are more appropriate for consideration by the police and the courts.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council has fined motorists for failing to comply with a restriction which has no basis in law. He says the Council has committed at least two civil wrongs and up to four crimes by issuing penalty charge notices (PCNs), taking payments and defending appeals. He claims the Council’s actions have caused him financial loss and distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. It is not our role to determine whether council officers have broken the law or are liable for civil wrongs which may give rise to claims for damages. These are matters for the police and the courts, respectively.
5. The Council now accepts its interpretation of the Traffic Management Order (TMO) for the section of road in question was wrong and it has taken appropriate action to remedy the issue. It confirms it will apply for a new TMO to enact the restriction it intended to apply and has placed any further enforcement action at the location on hold in the meantime. It has also refunded Mr X’s payment for the PCN and agreed to refund other affected motorists.
6. This provides a suitable remedy for the complaint and it is unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for Mr X or other members of the public.
7. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has provided a suitable remedy for the issue Mr X complains about.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman