Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking provision outside a shop because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has failed to carry out enforcement of parking restrictions outside his shop because of faded bay markers on the road.
2. Mr Y says this has led to vehicles parking on the road outside his shop for significantly over the hour available, which he says has led to damage to his business including a drop in footfall.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In this case, the Council has agreed to repaint the white line markings on the road and then take enforcement action for those who park for longer than the time allowed, it has not told Mr Y when this will happen. It initially told Mr Y that it would do this as part of resurfacing works on the road, and then when the plans for this were delayed, said it would complete this work as a priority. This means that while the Council has agreed to complete the work, it has not told Mr Y when this will be.
6. Mr Y says the Council’s failure to repaint the lines on the road outside his shop is leading to drivers parking for significantly more than the hour allowed under the road restrictions. He says that this in turn affects footfall into his shop and lead customers to either go elsewhere or to cancel appointments with his business.
7. While Mr Y may feel strongly about this, his injustice is speculative and we would not be able to link the Council’s lack of enforcement action or decision not to repaint the white lines for parking on the road to the loss of business for Mr Y, if we were to investigate this complaint.
8. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered a serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss of injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
9. As we would consider Mr Y’s injustice to be speculative, any remaining injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement in his complaint. Mr Y may feel strongly about the issue, but we would not consider this to be a serious loss or harm. Therefore we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman