Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s electric vehicle charging policy. This is because there is no significant injustice and it is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council delayed in implementing its policy on charging electric vehicles at home. He is also unhappy with the method of charging allowed under the policy. Mr X says that the delay meant he had to pay to charge his vehicle elsewhere, and the Council’s chosen method of charging will be more expensive for him.

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 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)
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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X owns an electric vehicle (EV) but does not have any off street parking. He says that in 2023 he contacted the Council to ask about charging an EV on the street. At the time, the Council did not have a policy in place.
7. In November 2025, the Council put in place an EV charging policy. This allows for EV’s to be charged using cables inside pavement channels. Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s decision. He says he would prefer to use a cable cover, which sits on top of the pavement.
8. The Council’s cabinet document, dated 18 November 2025, sets out the reasons for its decision. This document also sets out the information the Council considered when making its decision. This included Government guidance and strategy, legislation and an internal impact assessment.
9. Mr X complained to the Council in November 2025. Whilst investigating Mr X’s complaint, the Council considered his points but said it would not change its view. The Council acknowledged the delay in implementing the policy, and apologised to Mr X.
10. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman in January 2026.

Assessment

11. Although Mr X is unhappy about the Council’s EV charging policy, we cannot question a decision that was taken properly. The Council’s cabinet document provides a detailed explanation of its decision, which showed it considered a range of available information. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision to justify our involvement.
12. The Council accepted there was a delay in implementing a policy on charging EV’s. It apologised to Mr X in its complaint response. Mr X says that he had to use other charging methods during this period. This is not significant enough injustice to justify our involvement, as it was Mr X’s choice to buy an EV without there being off street charging in place.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no significant injustice and it is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman