Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking permits. This is because there is insufficient injustice to justify our involvement. Also, as we are unable to deal with the substantive issue it is not a good use of public resources to investigate the Council’s handling of Mr Y’s complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains the Council introduced an online virtual visitor parking permits without publicity and without consultation with the public. He also complains the Council did not tell him he could get a permit by telephone and told him twice that he had to use its online service.
2. Mr Y feels upset and angry at the Council’s response as he did then go online and purchase £10 worth of parking permits, which he says he will not use now he is able to get paper permits by using the telephone service. He also feels it is unfair that the Council moved to an online system as many older people cannot or do not use the internet.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
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 Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council introduced a new online visitor parking permit system, to replace a previous paper-based system, in late 2021. This means that residents can now apply for a visitor’s parking permit on an online account on the Council’s website.
7. Mr Y was unhappy at the change, particularly that the change was made without publicity and without consultation. He contacted the Council to complaint about this in late 2021. He was unhappy with the Council’s initial response, where he was told by telephone that he would need to apply for a parking permit online.
8. Mr Y then emailed the Council in January 2022 asking it to reconsider its response. The Council wrote to Mr Y in February, explaining that it understood Mr Y’s concerns about people without easy computer access being unable to apply for a visitor parking permit. It gave details on how residents can request a parking permit and make payment for this by telephone. It also provided Mr Y with £10 worth of parking permits, which usually cost £1 per day, as a gesture of goodwill.
9. Mr Y says he is unhappy with this as he has now paid £10 for parking permits online, which he says he will not now use as he is able to obtain paper permits again. He is also upset at the Council’s initial response which told him to go online with no reference to being able to get a permit by telephone. He contacted us in February.

Analysis

10. While Mr Y may have preferred the Council to have widely publicised the change and consult on it with residents before making the change, Mr Y has been able to both go online to purchase visitor parking permits successfully. While this may have caused Mr Y some annoyance, there is not significant enough injustice to warrant our investigation of his complaint.
11. Mr Y has told us he would like to have the permits he bought through the Council’s online service to be refunded to him. This can be done through the Council’s website, which Mr Y now has use of. As Mr Y can use email, as he did in his complaint correspondence, and has been able to purchase permits online, I would consider it reasonable that he follows the Council’s online guidance on how to do this.
12. Mr Y has also complained about the information he was given when he initially made his complaint, where he says the Council said he could only purchase a parking permit online. However, as we are not looking at the substantive matter, as explained above, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council handled the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is insufficient injustice to warrant our investigation. Also, as we are unable to deal with the substantive issue it is not a good use of public resources to investigate the Council’s handling of Mr Y’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman