Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council considered a request for a residential parking scheme. We do not find the Council at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to properly consider a request for a residential parking scheme for a housing development he lives on and has failed to properly respond to reports of illegal parking in disabled bays.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mr 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

Relevant law and policy

Residential parking zones

7. The Council publishes its policy for residential parking zones on its website. This explains residential parking zones are to help people living in areas where there is high demand for on-street parking, such as town centres or near large employers.
8. The Council’s website explains residential parking zones are designed to give residents priority but do not entitle residents to a particular parking space at all times. The Council’s policy explains residential parking zones are set up to discourage commuter and long-stay parking in areas where parking is at a premium.
9. The Council’s website explains there is currently no funding allocated to assess or implement new residents’ parking schemes and any proposed schemes would need to be assessed, implemented and fully funded by a third party.

Illegal parking in disabled bays

10. The Council carries out monitoring through routine patrols by Civil Enforcement Officers in relevant areas.
11. Where the Council receives reports of illegal parking it schedules enforcement visits.
12. Where Civil Enforcement Officers witness illegal parking they can issue Parking Charge Notices.

Principles of Good Administrative Practice

13. The Ombudsman has published a document setting out principles of good administrative practice and what we expect to see from councils.
14. This explains staff should be able to appropriately exercise their professional judgment to meet properly assessed service needs. We expect Councils to show they have considered requests on their individual merits rather than rigidly applying blanket policies and effectively fettering their discretion.

What happened

15. I have summarised below some key events leading to Mr X’s complaint. While I have considered everything submitted, this is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
16. There is no residential parking scheme in force for Mr X’s road. There is parking on one side of the road which includes several disabled bays.
17. Mr X contacted the Council to report problems with people parking in disabled bays without displaying a blue badge which prevented local residents using the bays and asked for a warden to be sent to the area. The Council referred the report to its local parking team who attended the area. The warden did not witness any illegal parking, so no enforcement action was taken.
18. Mr X then contacted the Council to report general parking issues. Mr X asked the Council to visit the site and consider options to alleviate the parking issues and asked whether parking permits could be considered. Mr X explained many of the residents have mobility issues and asked this to be taken into account.
19. The Council has said an engineer visited the site for fact-finding purposes to confirm the existing parking arrangements and on-street conditions but there was no indication the matter required escalation. The Council said the visit concluded:
• The location is not a high-demand parking area;
• Existing parking arrangements had been in place for more than 20 years with no recorded issues;
• Neighbouring properties have substantial off-street parking provision; and
• No other residents had raised complaints about access or mobility associated with parking at this location.
20. The Council acknowledged that parking issues were a common problem but explained there was a significant proportion of off-street parking available in the area. The Council explained parking spaces, including disabled bays, could not be reserved but operated on a first come first served basis and it was up to the consideration of other road users to decide where to park. The Council explained that, as per its policy, due to funding issues it was not looking to assess or implement any new resident parking schemes and any proposed schemes would need to be assessed, implemented and fully funded by a third party.
21. Mr X complained to the Council about its inflexibility and its refusal to implement a residential parking scheme. Mr X said the mobility of many of the residents meant they needed direct access between their homes and their vehicles.
22. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint to repeat that, as per its policy, due to lack of funding, it was not able to consider assessing or implementing new resident parking schemes and these would need to be assessed, implemented and funded by a third party.
23. The Council has said when Mr X asked for an escalation of his complaint, his case was referred to the director’s office. The Council has said consideration of matters outside of its usual policy framework occurs at this senior level. The Council has said senior management reviewed all available information and determined Mr X’s circumstances did not represent a significant area of concern that would warrant applying discretion.

Analysis

24. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. It is not our role to take a second look at a decision to decide whether it was right or wrong. Instead, we look at the way the Council made its decision. If we consider the Council followed processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether the complainant disagrees with the decision the Council made.
25. The Council considered Mr X’s request for a residential parking scheme and explained that in line with its published policy it will not implement any new schemes and this would need to be assessed, implemented and fully funded by a third party. As the Council has correctly followed its policy as it is written, I cannot find fault with the decision it has reached.
26. However, we also expect councils to make decisions on a case-by-case basis, rather than rigidly applying policies that prevent them from considering the specifics of an individual case. We expect councils to appropriately exercise their discretion in a way that is fair and not predetermined to ensure decisions are based on evidence and relevant circumstances.
27. The Council has explained the individual circumstances of Mr X’s case were considered by senior management once he escalated his complaint. The Council has explained all the circumstances were taken into account, but it decided these did not represent a significant area of concern that would warrant applying discretion. While I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision, as it considered all the circumstances it was presented with, I cannot find fault with its decision-making process.
28. Mr X has also said the Council has failed to deal with illegal parking in disabled bays in the area. However, the Council correctly followed its policy when it received reports of illegal parking. As the Council did not witness any illegal parking, it did not take further action. I do not find fault with the process the Council followed here.

Back to top

Decision

29. I find no fault with how the Council considered Mr X’s request or whether to apply its discretion to step outside of its usual policy. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman