Summary: Mr X complains he is unable to access the garages he rents from the Council due to it failing to take enforcement action against vehicles parked on yellow lines outside of the garages. There is no fault by the Council as the yellow lines are unenforceable.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council is failing to enforce parking restrictions against individuals parking in front of two garages he rents from the Council. Mr X says he is unable to get his vehicle out of one of the garages due to people parking on the yellow lines opposite the garages.
2. The Council has responded to Mr X’s complaint but he is unhappy with the outcome. Mr X would like a substantial amount of compensation for the times he has been unable to use the garages while paying rent for them.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated all of Mr X’s complaints but I discontinued my investigation on his complaint about the amount of rent the Council is charging him from 1 April 2019. I have addressed this complaint in the ‘Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate’ section at the end of this statement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered Mr X’s complaint and discussed it with him on the telephone.
7. I considered the information I received from the Council.
8. Mr X and the Council were given the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered the Council’s comments about the rent charges from 1 April 2019 and that it had not had the opportunity to investigate and respond to this specific complaint from Mr X. Mr X requested and was granted an extension to the deadline to submit his comments to the draft decision but no comments were received.

Back to top

What I found

9. Mr X rented two garages on Road A from the Council for around 20 years.
10. There is a block of ten garages, a tarmac road approximately the width of two cars in front of the garages, yellow lines and then a wall.
11. The garages are located in a highly residential area. Mr X does not live near the garages.
12. Mr X has reported concerns about vehicles parked outside of the garages over the past five years. Mr X’s complaints dating back to January 2013 refer to the introduction of parking permits in the area as the cause for vehicles being parked in front of the garages.
13. Mr X has sent photographs to the Council of the cars that are blocking access to his garages.
14. Mr X complained of a van parked outside of his garages. The Council conducted a site visit to carry out an inspection. It found there was a van parked outside of the garages, but it was not parked outside of Mr X’s garages.
15. Mr X accrued rent arrears on the garages of £274.02.
16. Mr X contacted the Council in November 2018 to discuss the rent arrears and that his disability discount had not been applied.
17. Mr X requested to be relocated to alternative garages. The Council offered Mr X garages four minutes’ drive/ten minutes’ walk from the garages Mr X was already renting. Mr X refused these as they were too far away from his home address. The Council said these garages were the nearest that were available at the time. The Council said it would continue to explore other options.
18. Mr X referred his complaint to his local Councillor. The Council offered Mr X a choice of alternative garages. Mr X visited four garages and advised the Council in December 2018 he would like the garages at Road B.
19. The Council sent its final complaint response to Mr X in January 2018. It said the following:
• The Council retrospectively applied the disability discount to both of Mr X’s garage accounts. It said that it would continue to apply this discount on the grounds that he continued to be registered as disabled.
• It confirmed Mr X had chosen the garages at Road B after visiting four garages.
• The Council apologised it had taken so long for the matter to be resolved.
• It apologised for the distress and inconvenience he had experienced as a result of the significant delay in resolving the situation and the time and trouble he had expended in seeking a resolution.
20. As a remedy for the above, the Council said it would waive the rent arrears of £274.02 on both garage accounts and award him £200 in compensation. It also said the repairs for the garages at Road B were ongoing and it would inform him once the garages were available for occupancy.
21. Mr X was dissatisfied with the £200 compensation the Council offered. He felt it should be much more.

The Council’s response to my enquiries

22. The work on the garages at Road B is complete. Mr X has advised the Council he no longer wants to move to the garages at Road B. These garages are now unavailable.
23. There is a gallows gate in situ but this would not alleviate the concerns Mr X raises as access would need to be given to all residents, not just those who rent the garages, as there is parking access at the rear of the block.
24. The Council has inspected the site about the van Mr X says is blocking access to his garages. The Council says the photographs Mr X provided do not show the van parked outside the garages Mr X rents.
25. The Council has also investigated Mr X’s concerns about the owner of the van squatting at the garages. The Council says it has found no evidence of this. It found the owner of the van was a resident of the estate and rents a garage at the site.
26. Mr X has not provided any details regarding the number of times he was unable to make use of the garages therefore the Council was unable to asses the exact amount to be awarded to Mr X. It decided to waive the rent arrears and offer a financial remedy of £200 based on the Ombudsman’s guidelines in similar instances.
27. The Council said the best option for Mr X would be to relocate or terminate his agreement.

Back to top

Analysis

28. Mr X would like the Council to take enforcement action against the members of the public who park their vehicles on the yellow lines outside the garages he rents from the Council.
29. The stretch of road outside of the garages is a private estate road. Plans to introduce controlled parking on the estate were rejected by the residents by way of consultation. As a deterrent and to prevent people parking in front of the garages, the Council painted yellow lines. However, these are not enforceable. There is no fault by the Council.
30. I acknowledge the vehicles parked outside the garages cause Mr X frustration. The Council is unable to take enforcement action against the individuals but it has painted yellow lines to deter people from parking and it has offered Mr X alternative garages. The Council has given Mr X a choice of garages and completed work to fix the garages he chose at Road B. Mr X then decided not to relocate to Road B.
31. Mr X is entitled to refuse the solution the Council has offered, and he is also entitled to terminate his agreement to rent the garages at Road A if he remains unhappy. Mr X has advised me he now only rents one garage from the Council.
32. The Council has waived the arrears of £274.02 accrued by Mr X and offered him £200 for distress and inconvenience.
33. Mr X has complained about the rent increases. I consider there is no fault in the Council’s decision to increase the rent as it is entitled to make such decisions.

Back to top

Final decision

34. There was no fault by the Council. Therefore, we have completed our investigation and closed this complaint.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

35. During my investigation, Mr X advised me the Council had wrote to him with the new charges for rent from 1 April 2019. Mr X said the Council was charging him more than its website stated. I discontinued my investigation into this aspect of Mr X’s complaint as it must first be put through the Council’s complaints procedure.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman