Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that he had to pay for parking which should have been free. This is because the claimed injustice is not significant or serious enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr B says a payment machine in a Council car park did not have the option to choose free parking for up to two hours. So, he had to pay £3.30 to park his car for a short period when according to a sign parking should have been free. Mr B would like the Council to issue a refund for £3.30.

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 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 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))
3. This is because 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 serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr B.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because the claimed injustice is not significant or serious enough to justify public money being spent on an investigation or the pursuit of a financial remedy by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman