Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s decision to allow vehicles from a funfair to park in disabled parking spaces which meant his mother’s vehicle could not use them. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr B, complains about the Council’s decision, on the day a fundraising event was held, to allow the owners of the funfair at the event to park their vehicles in some disabled bays. This meant the vehicle transporting his disabled mother could not park near the beach and this spoilt the family’s day out. Mr B seeks an apology from the Council and says it should issue parking fines to the funfair vehicles’ owners.

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’. 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

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Mr B, including the Council’s responses to his complaint. I gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr B’s sister drove their elderly, wheelchair bound mother to visit Mr B at the beach. However, when their vehicle arrived at the car park, his sister could not park it because the owners of vehicles who had set up a funfair for a fundraising event had parked in the disabled bays.
5. Mr B complained about this to the Council. It apologised for the inconvenience caused to him and his family and explained that, due to gusting winds, officers had allowed funfair vehicles to park in some disabled bays so high sections of the funfair could be quickly removed. It confirmed that if the same situation occurred in the future it would assess the situation and make a judgement at the time.

Assessment

6. I do not doubt the inconvenience and distress caused to Mr B and his family on this day. However, the Council has already apologised to him for this. It cannot issue parking fines to the funfair vehicles concerned because the drivers received permission to park in the bays from the Council.
7. While I note that the Council’s last response to Mr B did not make mention of his right to make a complaint to the Ombudsman about this matter, I do not consider that an investigation by the Ombudsman would add to any significant degree to that already undertaken by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman