Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a council community parking management scheme in operation outside his mother’s home. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision-making process.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, complained about the Council’s community parking management scheme (CPMS) in operation outside his mother’s home. He told us he now must to pay a fee if he wishes to visit his mother at the times the scheme operates.

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
• 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)

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the information Mr B provided, including the Council’s final response to his complaint and the Council’s CPMS Principles of Operation. I have given Mr B an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B’s mother lives in a controlled parking zone which operates for two time periods a day Monday to Saturday. Mr B told us he explained to the Council his mother does not drive so the free resident’s parking permit she is entitled to should be passed to him because he is the sole driver of the family.
6. In its response to Mr B’s complaint the Council said it had carried out public consultation with residents and businesses on the streets affected. Residents and businesses were able to vote on the Council’s proposals. The Council told Mr B the majority of the responses were in favour of the CPMS. It then decided to go ahead with its proposals.
7. Residents in the CPMS area can apply for a free parking permit if they have a vehicle registered at their property. But the Council’s Principles of Operation state this permit is not transferable to another vehicle. Residents can apply for one visitor’s permit at a cost of £40 if they are not blue badge holders or they can show they receive regular long term care. Residents can also buy a book of ten scratch card visitor permits for £10. Mr B told us he would have to pay £40 a year for a visitor’s permit regardless of his mother's entitlement to a free permit which is not being used. He feels the Council has been less than sympathetic, in particular because his mother relies on him to take her out into the community for shopping and other needs. He feels the Council could have transferred the resident’s permit to him or waived the £40 charge. He does not feel he should have to pay to visit his mother or plan his visits around the operation times of the CPMS.
8. The Council has not agreed to Mr B’s proposal to either transfer a resident’s permit to him or waive the £40 fee. It says its officers must ensure they adhere to the Council’s Principles of Operation to ensure they deliver a fair and consistent approach to residents.
9. Mr B has explained clearly why he does not agree with the operation of the CPMS on his mother’s street and the Council’s failure to make an exception in his case. But there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decisions. It introduced the CPMS after public consultation, it has considered what Mr B has said and it has explained the reasons for its decision. That means we cannot question whether the Council’s decision was right or wrong even though Mr B disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision-making process.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman