Summary: Miss X complains the Council delayed dealing with a disabled parking bay application, causing avoidable distress. The Council is at fault because it delayed processing the application. Miss X suffered avoidable distress. The Council should apologise and pay Miss X £250.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, complains the Council delayed dealing with a disabled parking bay application.
2. Miss X says she suffered avoidable distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

5. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened?

7. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
8. Miss X requested the Council install a disabled parking bay in March 2024.
9. The Council accepted her request in May 2024.
10. The request was passed to a team in the Council to deliver it in August 2024.
11. Miss X complained to the Council about delays in September 2024. The Council responded that her application had been successful and consultation would begin in October.
12. In October 2024, Miss X escalated her complaint. The Council responded saying consultation would begin in November and the disabled parking bay should be in place by mid-December 2024.

Analysis

13. The Council accepts that there was at least a three month delay in progressing Miss X’s application.
14. The Council has provided the Ombudsman with evidence it has consulted and taken the decision to implement the disabled parking bay in March 2025. It says the works should have been completed by the end of May.
15. There has therefore been a further delay of five months, past the date the Council told Miss X the work would be completed by.
16. This is fault by the Council. Miss X suffered avoidable distress.
17. The Council has already apologised to Miss X for some of the delay in its complaint response.

Back to top

Action

18. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of this decision:
• Apologise to Miss X for the further delay identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Pay Miss X £250 in respect of avoidable distress.
19. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

20. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman