Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of parking on his street. This is because the Council has accepted some fault and taken action to correct the parking issues, and we would not add value by investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has used unclear signage, language and plans leading to confusion about where residents can lawfully park. He also complains the Council has failed to adhere to published plans to install parking markings. Mr X also complains the Council has not reinstated a parking bay in front of a neighbouring property. Mr X says the Council’s responses to his complaint have included misleading information. Mr X says there have been fewer spaces to park because of the Council’s errors.

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. 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)
4. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X raises a number of issues about the way the Council has dealt with the parking provision on his street. He says the Council has left it unclear where residents should park lawfully, and limited the parking space available to him.
8. Mr X says the Council failed to adhere to its own plans to deal with the issues raised, and provided inaccurate responses to his complaint.
9. The Council has accepted and apologised for misleading language in its responses and a delay in providing its stage one complaint response.
10. The Council confirms that double yellow lines will be installed within the next 10 days and it has sent letters to all properties in the area notifying them of the planned work. It has also updated its website.
11. The Council has explained its reasoning for not reinstating the parking bay outside Mr X’s neighbouring property. Although Mr X remains unhappy, the Council is entitled to reach the decision it has. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision. It considered Mr X’s request, visited the site to measure the space available and considered other parking bays which are smaller than its policy allows.
12. The actions the Council has taken clarify the parking restrictions in the area.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not add to the Council’s investigation, and would not achieve any different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman