Summary: Miss X complained about parking restriction signs being installed on her street without sufficient consultation with residents. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the size of signs erected to indicate the start of a controlled parking zone which was introduced in her area. She says the signs are too big and have blighted the street scene close to her home. She would like to have the signs removed and future consultation on parking zones to include details of sign dimensions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. The complainant now has an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X says the Council failed to consult properly with residents when it proposed to introduce a controlled parking zone in her area. She says the residents were not advised about the size of the signs marking the entrance and exit of the zone in the consultation for the Traffic Regulation Order on the scheme.
8. The Council says the details of the restrictions and extent of the scheme were published. It did not include technical details of the signage involved because this is not a matter which the highway authority has control over. The signs have to comply with Department for Transport regulations and these are specified in guidance by that department in the Traffic Signs Manual.
9. The signs are a requirement of the legal order and have to give sufficient notice to drivers about the extent and regulations of the scheme for parking enforcement to be valid.
10. The Council cannot remove the signs and their inclusion in the Traffic Regulation Order was not a matter which they needed to convey to residents when notifying them about the proposals for the scheme.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman