Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s response to her reports of abandoned vehicles. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s response to her reports of abandoned vehicles on the road where she lives.

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 effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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))
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X complained to the Council about two parked vehicles on the road where she lives which she believes are abandoned. She said the two vehicles had not been moved for two months and were taking up residential parking spaces. One of the vehicles was also unsecured with tools in the back. Miss X said the vehicles may be linked to local garages leaving vehicles on the road.
8. The Council considered Miss X’s reports. It explained there is no statutory definition of abandonment for a vehicle and so it determines whether a vehicle is abandoned on a case by case basis, taking account of relevant information. Having assessed the vehicles, it told Miss X it did not consider the vehicles to be abandoned and it would take no further action. Both vehicles were taxed and legally parked. It noted the vehicles had only been in place for a couple of months and it was reasonable for the owners to leave them there. It noted Miss X’s comment about the local garages. It invited Miss X to provide any evidence she has that the vehicles are being left by local garages so that it could contact them to ask them not to do so. It noted however, that leaving a taxed vehicle legally parked on the road is not in itself an offence.
9. Miss X later reported a third vehicle which had been parked on the road and not moved for almost a month. The Council found the vehicle was taxed, MOT’d and legally parked. It did not consider it to be abandoned and told Miss X it would not take any further action.
10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because whilst I note Miss X is dissatisfied with the Council’s decision that the cars are not abandoned, there is no sign of fault by the Council here. It has acted on Miss X’s reports and taken suitable action to investigate and assess whether the cars are abandoned. It has clearly explained why it does not consider the cars to be abandoned. There is nothing further we could add. It is a matter for the Council to assess and decide and it has taken account of relevant factors.
11. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at the Council’s decision. Instead, we look at whether there is sign of fault in the process by which it made its decision. I have seen no evidence of such fault here and we cannot question the merits of the Council’s decision even though Miss X disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman