Summary: Ms X, on behalf of a residents group, complained the Council failed to provide a deadline by which it would amend a traffic order to enable it to take enforcement action against council staff misusing their parking permits in the area where she resides. There is fault by the Council and it has agreed to apologise to the residents group and provide them with a date of when the relevant traffic order will take effect and enforcement action will begin.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains on behalf of a group of residents. They complain that the Council has failed to provide a deadline by which it will amend a traffic order to enable it to take enforcement action against council staff misusing their essential service permits (ESPs) in her local area.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’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

4. I considered Ms X’s complaint and the information she provided.
5. I considered the information I received from the Council in response to my enquiries.
6. Ms X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on a draft of my decision. I have considered the comments received from Ms X and the Council.

Back to top

What I found

7. Ms X submitted a complaint to the Council on behalf of a group of residents. She complained that council staff were misusing ESPs in her area and it was resulting in parking difficulties for residents. Ms X said the matter had been ongoing for nine years.
8. The Council did not uphold Ms X’s complaint at stage 1 of its complaint process. Council staff were continuing to misuse the ESPs and it was resulting in little or no available parking spaces for residents. Ms X escalated her complaint to stage 2 and provided the Council with photographic evidence of the continuing problem caused its officers.
9. The Council reviewed its stage 1 response. It upheld Ms X’s complaint at stage 2 and said the following:
• It agrees that an ESP would not be valid if the permit holder is not carrying out the relevant duties close by at the time.
• It is likely that the vehicles in question were not carrying out the relevant duties and therefore should not have been parked where they were.
• The Council has never disputed that some ESP holders are not using them for the purpose intended.
• The anecdotal evidence the Council has is that permit holders are not using them properly.
• The Council is committed to changing the traffic orders.
• If the vehicles are parked in the same locations again whilst displaying an ESP after the orders have been changed, they will be subject to enforcement action.
• The Council asked its officers to use Car Park A from 28 June 2018.
• The Council monitored the new arrangements however they did not seem to have been taken up sufficiently by ESP permit holders and so the decision was made to amend the traffic orders.
• The Council said it could not provide a date by which it will amend the orders by but it will ensure it is done as soon as possible.
10. Ms X was satisfied the Council upheld her complaint but she was concerned the Council could not provide a date by which it would amend the traffic order as she felt the matter had gone on for far too long.

Back to top

Analysis

11. The ESPs are issued to council officers involved in the delivery of essential services to residents. The Council has acknowledged council officers are misusing their ESPs. This is fault.
12. Council officers misuse of the ESPs is resulting in residents being unable to park and Ms X has highlighted an occasion where nurses attending to a patient at a resident’s home were unable to park due to the number of council officer’s vehicles incorrectly parked in the area.
13. The Council has attempted to resolve the matter by advising staff to use Car Park A but its monitoring of the situation showed council staff with ESPs were not following the instructions. The matter has continued and Ms X has provided photographic evidence of this to the Council and the Ombudsman. It continues to cause the residents problems when parking and it also continues to cause them frustration.

Agreed action

14. Ms X requested a date when the traffic order would come into force and for the Council to confirm in writing that enforcement is in effect. The Council has informed me the amended traffic order will come into effect on 18 September 2019 and it will provide the Residents Group with a copy of the updated traffic order.
15. The Council will provide the updated traffic order to Ms X and also to the Ombudsman by 30 September 2019 along with confirmation that it is taking enforcement action against those misusing their ESPs.
16. I consider the Council’s decision to amend the relevant traffic order to enable it to take enforcement action is an appropriate response. However, the Council has advised this will not take effect until 18 September 2019. Therefore, within four weeks of my final decision the Council will look into and implement ways to manage the misuse of ESPs by its council officers until the amended traffic order comes into force on 18 September 2019.
17. Within 4 weeks of my final decision, the Council will provide the Residents Group with a written apology.

Back to top

Final decision

18. There is fault by the Council and it has agreed to our recommendations to remedy the injustice. Therefore, I have completed my investigation and closed the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman