Summary: The complaint is about the Council not enforcing against parking on the pavement. The Ombudsman should not pursue this complaint because the matter complained of did not cause a significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains the Council is not enforcing against parking on the pavement. He considers this causes him and his daughter danger and inconvenience when his daughter’s wheelchair has to go into the road due to obstruction of the pavement.

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 the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Mr B provided. I gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr B’s daughter has a wheelchair. Mr B reports that car parking on the pavement prevented him pushing his daughter in her wheelchair along the pavement so he had to take the wheelchair into the road at least five times in a 48-hour period. Mr B is also dissatisfied the Council only issued a penalty charge notice after he contacted the Council three times. The Council is considering changing the parking arrangements in the area. Mr B argues that, until any new scheme is fully introduced, the Council should enforce against parking on the pavement.
5. As paragraph 2 explained, before deciding whether to a pursue a complaint we must consider the effect of the Council’s alleged fault.
6. I do appreciate that having to take the wheelchair into the road on the occasions Mr B describes over a two-day period would have caused some anxiety and inconvenience. I also note Mr B contacted the Council several times about the situation. While that amounts to some level of injustice, I do not consider it disadvantaged Mr B and his daughter significantly enough to warrant the Ombudsman devoting time and public money to investigating the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because the evidence suggests the claimed fault did not cause a significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman