Summary: Mr X complains that a consultation based on flawed information led the Council to decide to introduce parking controls. The Ombudsman does not intend to investigate as no order to introduce the parking controls has been made. Therefore, I do not consider that Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to carry out a satisfactory parking consultation on the possible introduction of parking controls where he loves. He says:
• the original consultation was misleading - the Council did not use fair reasoning, did not survey the facts and would not engage with him
• a vocal minority has been favoured rather than due process
• the Council did not used any objective standards and did not conform to home office standards on consultations
• the Council refuses to engage with his alternative proposal and has not acknowledged his communication
2. Mr X wants a new consultation carried out which includes a summary of alternatives or other suggestions.

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’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I spoke to Mr X and considered the information he provided.
5. I made enquiries of the Council and considered the documents it provided.
6. I referred to the relevant legislation, including the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (the Act) and the Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996) (the Regulations).
7. Mr X commented on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (the Act) covers introducing controlled parking zones (CPZs). A CPZ is an area where parking is only allowed on certain parts of the road for a limited time unless you have a permit. CPZs can be controversial because they can move parking from newly regulated areas into nearby unregulated areas.
9. To introduce a CPZ, the council must make a traffic management order (TMO) under the Regulations.
10. The Regulations set out procedures for consultation. The Council must carry out formal consultation with certain statutory bodies and it must deal with objections to a proposal before it makes a traffic management order to introduce a CPZ.
11. The Council must also publish a notice and “take such other steps as it may consider appropriate for ensuring that adequate publicity about the order is given to persons likely to be affected by its provisions”. The Regulations suggest these steps could include the delivery of letters to households and businesses likely to be affected and the display of notices in roads or “other places affected by the order”.
12. The notice must advise there is a right to apply to the High Court within six weeks of the date of the TMO. This can be on the basis the Council:
• does not have powers to make the order; or
• has not complied with the relevant Act or Regulations.

What happened

13. Mr X says that due to parking pressure in the road where he lives and surrounding area, some residents sent an e-petition to the Council. Mr X says the information in these petitions was misleading.
14. In response to the petitions the Council decided to carry out a consultation to gather residents views on parking.
15. The consultation document says:

“A number of requests together with a signed petition have been submitted to this Council asking for us to work with local residents of this area to deveopme suitable solutions to the parking difficulties. The plan below shows the area being consulted so that we can better understand local views towards parking.”

The document explained the choices of doing nothing or introducing parking controls. It included the charges for permits in the borough. It also outlined some advantages and disadvantages of permit parking.

16. Mr X disagrees that permit parking will not relieve parking problems where he lives. He complained to the Council that its consultation was misleading. He is concerned the e-petitions had a low-level of response and asked whether those who had responded already have off-road parking. He also complained the consultation gave no information about the minimum threshold for response required to trigger further action.
17. The Council published the results of the consultation. It advised that of those who responded 59% supported parking permit controls. It proposed to introduce parking controls. However, because of the potential for parking to be displaced into nearby roads, the Council decided to consult with the other residents and businesses that may be affected; before introducing parking controls.
18. Mr X made several requests under the Freedom of Information Act for information about the results of the Council’s consultation. He also complained that:
• parking controls would not make any difference to the parking problems where he lives
• the Council responded to the loud minority who had arranged and responded to the e-petitions
• the Council had failed to respond to his alternative suggestions and was therefore not a fair consultation
19. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint:
• The proposed parking controls will apply during daytime to resolve pressure cause by commuter parking. They are not designed to reduce parking difficulties in the evenings caused by other reasons such as households owning multiple cars.
• There was no suggestion that holding a permit guarantees a parking space.
• It advised the Council considered the e-petitions warranted further investigation, so it consulted residents.
• The consultation was informal. If it introduces parking controls, it will follow the requirements of the Road Traffic Act 1984.

Assessment

20. The Council has advised that at the time of writing this draft decision), the formal consultation took place as per its statutory obligations under the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996. The purpose of this is not to ‘re-run’ the earlier consultation; but to allow residents to raise material objections based on how the proposal may affect them personally.
21. Mr X has provided copies of his objections to the proposed parking controls which he has sent to the Council.
22. The Council considers parking controls are needed and so begun the process to make a Traffic Management Order. While I recognise Mr X disagrees with this decision, he has made a make a formal objection to the proposed TMO which the Council must consider.
23. I appreciate Mr X is concerned that a flawed information consultation led the Council’s decision to introduce parking controls. But the Council was not obliged to carry out any informal consultation.
24. He also says the Council did not make it clear that the original consultation was information, not did it explicitly state that holding a parking permit is no guarantee of a parking space.
25. I have reviewed the consultation document and agree it does not state that having a parking permit is no guarantee of a parking space. But neither does it state that having a permit does guarantee a space. The document is silent on this and I do not agree with Mr X’s view that the consultation was misleading.
26. At the time of writing this decision, no order has been made to introduce the TMO, so I cannot say that Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice.
27. The Council will publish a notice if it decides to make a TMO. Then Mr X will have a specific right to apply to the High Court if he believes the Council has not followed the correct procedures.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I will not investigate this complaint. The Council is formally consulting on its proposal to introduced parking controls. At the time of writing no decision has been made so I do not consider Mr X has suffered a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman