Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in treating Mr X’s car as an abandoned vehicle and disposing of it. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council removed and disposed of his car parked in front of his garage without any notice when it was not restricting access and was still driveable. The car held great sentimental value to him and he seeks compensation for the loss of the vehicle.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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)
3. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant’s representative, including the Council’s response to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X’s car was reported to the Council’s Nuisance Vehicle Team, inspected and removed and destroyed.
7. Mr X’s representative complained to the Council about its actions, stating that he should have received a 15-day notice period in which to contest the removal.
8. The Council responded under the two stages of its complaints procedure. It explained its inspection of the car (SORN and parked on Council owned land) had shown it to be in poor condition and meeting the criteria of an abandoned vehicle. It said where it is decided that a vehicle is abandoned, it is the duty of the local authority to remove the vehicle and in such cases no 15-day notice period is required. It did not uphold Mr X’s complaint.
9. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions taken by councils with which complainants disagree. The car was deemed to meet the abandoned vehicle criteria and removed and disposed of in accordance with normal procedures. We cannot question council decisions if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information and while the disposal of the car has been distressing for Mr X, there is no evidence to suggest the Council acted with fault.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman