Summary: Mr X complained the Council has not made adequate reasonable adjustments for disabled people to park in the city centre. He believes its policies are discriminatory. There was no fault in the way the Council considered reasonable adjustments and its parking policy is in line with relevant guidance. It is for the Court, not the Ombudsman, to say whether policies are lawful or discriminatory.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Mr X, said the Council has not made adequate reasonable adjustments for disabled people to park in the city centre. He believes its policies are discriminatory.
2. Mr X would like the Council to offer free off-street parking for disabled users or make on-street parking more accessible.

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 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

5. As part of the investigation I have considered the following:
• The complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, as well as the information we discussed in a telephone conversation.
• Documents provided by the Council and its comments in response to my enquiries.
• The Equality Act 2010.
• The Blue Badge scheme: rights and responsibilities in England. (updated 21 August 2017)
• The Council’s Parking Policy.
• I have written to Mr X and the Council with my draft decision and given them an opportunity to comment.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Equality Act 2010 brought together all previous equality legislation. The Act includes a new public sector equality duty. This includes a duty for public sector bodies to make reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities.
7. The duty to make reasonable adjustments is anticipatory. This means that, within reason, a council should not wait until a disabled person wants to use its services. Instead, it should consider in advance what disabled people with different impairments might reasonably need.
8. The duty is owed to all potential disabled service users, not just to those a council knows about. A council is not expected to anticipate the needs of every individual who may use its services.
9. In circumstances where a practice or physical feature puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage, a council must take reasonable steps to avoid the disadvantage. If an auxiliary aid is required to avoid the disadvantage, a council must take reasonable steps to provide it. (Equality Act 2010, Section 20, Duty to Make Adjustments)
10. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has issued guidance advising public sector bodies about their equality duties and how they can comply with them. The EHRC has the power to take enforcement action against public sector bodies, including councils, which fail to comply with their public sector equality duties. Its Compliance and Enforcement Policy says it may take enforcement action based on complaints from individuals.
11. The Equality Act enables someone to make a claim to the County Court if he believes a public sector body has breached its public sector equality duties. The County Court may award damages.
12. The Equality and Advisory Support Service (EASS) advises and helps individuals on issues about equality and human rights.
13. National guidance says blue badge holders may park on-street free of charge for as long as they need to. They may also park in disabled bays free and for as long as necessary, unless signs say otherwise.
14. Councils should provide off-street car parking spaces for disabled people. It is up to each council to decide whether to charge blue badge holders for parking.

The Council’s policy

15. The Council’s policy confirms it provides disabled parking through the blue badge scheme. Vehicles displaying a blue badge may park in any on-street pay and display area free of charge with no time limit.
16. Disabled parking spaces may be provided on-street to aid access in commercial areas. There may be limits on the duration of stay in areas of high demand. This is to achieve greater turnover of use.
17. Off-street pay and display car parks run in areas where demand is high, and it is desirable to manage the duration of stay.

Back to top

What happened

18. Mr X contacted the Council by telephone in April 2019 to express concerns about accessibility at car park A within the city. He said he could not use the pay and display machines at the car park because of his disability.
19. The Council offered Mr X a monthly parking permit which Mr X would have to pay for in advance. It considered this to be a reasonable adjustment because Mr X no longer had to handle money or use the pay and display machines.
20. Mr X said the permit was too expensive and he sometimes had to work different or longer hours. The Council offered Mr X a weekly permit instead which included extended hours from 8am to 10pm at no extra cost. He can also claim back money for days when he did not work.
21. Mr X wanted the Council to provide parking in car park A free of charge, or at the same price as nearby Council car park B or a private car park in the city. He said he could not use Council car park B because it does not have disabled parking bays and he could not use the private car park because of accessibility issues with the entrance barriers. He also said it was not safe to park on-street because the kerbs are too high, and it is dangerous for him to get out of his vehicle into the road with a wheelchair.
22. Mr X made a formal complaint to the Council by email on 16 April 2019 about the accessibility of parking meters at car park A and about issues with the safety of on-street parking.
23. The Council contacted Mr X by email on 1 May 2019 to confirm its offer of a parking permit, which it considered to be a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act.
24. On 14 May 2019 Mr X parked in car park A without displaying a ticket. He left a note on his windscreen to say he had not bought a ticket because he was in dispute with the Council over breaches of the Equality Act.
25. The Council sent an email to Mr X on 14 May 2019 to tell him that he cannot park without displaying a ticket. It told him a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) will be issued in future. The Council also confirmed its offer of a permit remained open.
26. On 21 May 2019 Mr X telephoned the Council to say it had not dealt with his complaint properly and he wanted to meet with senior Council officers.
27. On 22 May 2019 Council officers met with Mr X to discuss his complaint. The Council confirmed to Mr X that its offer of a permit met its duties under the Equality Act. It also discussed other places Mr X could park, private car parks and its park and ride scheme.
28. Mr X said the Council raised the same alternatives earlier and they were not suitable. His disability prevented him from accessing the barriers at private car parks and from using the park and ride scheme. He said on-street parking was not safe and demand for spaces is high near to his work. The main issues are lack of maintenance, disrepair and not enough lowered kerbs. This means Mr X must use his wheelchair in the road until he can reach a lowered kerb. It can also mean travelling a greater distance in his wheelchair if he parks on another street. Mr X said the condition of the pavement recently caused him to fall from his wheelchair and suffer injury.
29. The Council wrote to Mr X on 24 May 2019 with its report on his complaint. It confirmed the Council believe the offer of a parking permit is a reasonable adjustment for the issues Mr X had in using parking meters. The Council recognised some on street parking bays may not suit all blue badge holders and it will bring this to the attention of its Traffic Assets Team for advice on access improvements. The Council said off-street parking comes with a fee and there is no policy or legislation stating it must provide off-street parking free to blue badge holders. It did consider Mr X’s request for free off-street parking, but it does not believe this adjustment is reasonable.
30. Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman on 28 May 2019 as he was unhappy with the Council’s response.

Council response to my enquiries

31. The Council’s internal communication dated 23 May 2019 confirmed its off-street car parking charges vary across the city, with short stay car parks typically having a higher rate. It cannot provide free off-street parking because it is the Council’s policy to charge in off-street car parks, including blue badge holders. It will bring the lack of lowered kerbs Mr X highlighted to the attention of its Assets Team for feedback on possible improvements. The surface at car park B is considered suitable for purpose.
32. The Council told me it could not offer Mr X off-street parking at a reduced rate without undermining the integrity of its parking scheme, which is in line with government guidance. It considers it is unreasonable to offer Mr X free parking on top of the adjustments it has offered.
33. The Council told me that, since his complaint, Mr X has used on-street parking. On the occasions he has used off-street parking he has contacted the Council and its civil enforcement officers helped Mr X to buy a ticket.
34. The Council said it will install disabled bays at car park B by the end of August 2019. Mr X confirmed the Council has done this but said there are only two disabled bays. The price of parking at car park B will be in line with car park A. It is also introducing a county wide scheme to allow all blue badge holders an extra hour of free parking once their off-street parking ticket expires.
35. Car park A has closed for redevelopment works and is due to reopen in around two years. The Council will offer Mr X a parking permit for car park B on the same terms it offered for car park A.
36. The Council spoke to a private car park on Mr X’s behalf and passed on the details so Mr X can contact the car park directly to discuss his needs.
37. The Council also spoke to its Traffic Assets Team about the lack of dropped kerbs on the street where Mr X wishes to park. There is a 12-month Traffic Regulation Order in place on the road, so the parking bays have moved to the North end of the road where there are dropped kerbs at regular intervals. The Council said it will work with its Traffic Asset Team if Mr X still has concerns.

Back to top

Analysis

38. Mr X could not use a physical feature in car park A, namely the pay and display machines. The Council has taken reasonable steps to avoid the disadvantage by offering Mr X a permit, so he does not have to use the machines.
39. The Council has showed it considered Mr X’s difficulties about the height of the kerbs by taking advice on possible adjustments. It will consider any further issues Mr X may raise.
40. Mr X said he cannot park on the street he would like to use, because the disabled bays only allow short stays. He would like the Council to address accessibility, maintenance, kerb height and safety of the surrounding streets. This is something Mr X can raise separately with the Council. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to advise the Council on highway maintenance and safety, we can only consider whether it reached its decisions properly. As above, the Council has agreed it will consider further separate issues.
41. The Council should provide disabled parking in its off-street car parks. Car park B did not have disabled bays before Mr X’s complaint, but the Council has confirmed it has taken action to install them.
42. The Council is not under a duty to provide off-street parking to Mr X free of charge. The Council has confirmed the action it took or proposed to take about Mr X’s complaints. I have seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to Mr X’s complaints. The Council has already properly addressed Mr X’s concerns and has provided reasons for the adjustments it has offered and for the adjustments it considers to be unreasonable. The Council has shown it properly considered all relevant information and it acted proportionately to Mr X’s requests. I therefore cannot question the merits of its decision not to provide the adjustments Mr X wanted.
43. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to say whether Council policies are lawful or discriminatory. These are matters for the Court.
44. Mr X feels the Council should provide free off-street parking as a reasonable adjustment because it cannot provide safe on-street parking. He says this is directly linked to his disability. As above, it is not for the Ombudsman to say whether the highway is safe or accessible. We look at whether the Council considered all relevant factors when it made its decision. The Council considered Mr X’s request but thought it was not reasonable and we cannot question the merits of its decision. It is within the Council’s gift to provide free parking, but we cannot say it discriminated against Mr X by not doing so.
45. If Mr X feels there are systemic or continuing problems, or the Council’s policies are discriminatory, he can complain to the Equality and Human Rights Commission or take action in the County Court.

Back to top

Final decision

46. I have completed my investigation. There was no fault in the way the Council considered reasonable adjustments and its parking policy is in line with the relevant guidance. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to say whether a Council’s policy is lawful or discriminatory. That is a matter for the Courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman