Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a disabled parking bay. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, disagrees with the Council’s decision that he cannot have a disabled parking bay. He says he cannot use his off-street parking due to his mobility issues.

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 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and the eligibility rules for a bay. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. People may be eligible for a disabled parking bay if they do not have access to off-street parking.
5. Mr X applied for a bay. The Council refused the application because Mr X has off-street parking at the rear of his property. The Council found that the parking space is 15 metres from his back door.
6. Mr X disagrees with the decision. He says the parking space is accessed along a path that can be slippery and via two steps. He says his mobility issues prevent him using the parking space.
7. In response to his appeal the Council said it cannot take Mr X’s mobility issues into account but must assess the application against the rules which do not include individual medical issues. The Council suggested Mr X could make alterations to the property to make it easier to access the parking space; for example, it suggested Mr X could install a ramp.
8. Mr X alleged there were other properties that have a bay and off-street parking. The Council said it could not share any information but that each application is individually assessed.
9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The policy says the Council may approve a bay if the applicant does not have access to off-street parking; the policy does not comment on whether the applicant thinks they can access the parking. I appreciate Mr X says his health prevents use of his parking space but as the decision reflects the policy there is no reason to start an investigation. And, regardless of Mr X’s views about other properties, it remains that his application does not meet the requirements.
10. Mr X disagrees with the decision and explained why he needs a bay. But, we are not an appeal body and cannot intervene because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with. Mr X could contact his local councillors if he thinks the policy should be changed to allow for personal mobility issues to be taken into account. We cannot tell the Council to change the policy or authorise a bay.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman