Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not dealt properly with an application for a parking permit. The Council is at fault because it gave Mr X incorrect advice which he relied on. Mr X suffered financial loss when he had to sell his car and incurred parking charges. The Council has agreed to pay Mr X £1805.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council has provided wrong advice about the availability of a parking permit and that he has been treated differently to other people in the same situation because:
• other residents who have been incorrectly issued parking permits have not had them revoked six months after he complained; and
• a further resident has been issued with a parking permit after the Council told Mr X he could not have one.
2. Mr X says he has had to sell his car at a £1700 loss and had to pay parking charges.

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. I have spoken to Mr X about his complaint and considered the information he has provided to the Ombudsman. I have also considered the Council’s response to his complaint and its response to my enquiries.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. Mr X lived at his flat in London. When it was built, the development was intended as a car free development. Mr X later realised that some of his neighbours had been issued with parking permits by the Council.
8. Mr X went to the Council’s customer service centre and asked if he was eligible for a parking permit. The Council told him the parking policy in relation to his property had been changed. Mr X was told he was eligible and bought a car.
9. After he had bought the car Mr X applied for a parking permit. The Council refused to grant Mr X a parking permit. Mr X sold his car.

Analysis

10. The Council accepted in its response to Mr X’s complaint that it gave Mr X the wrong advice when he first asked if he was eligible for a parking permit. This is fault by the Council. Mr X relied on the advice the Council gave him and incurred financial costs as a result.
11. I have seen the purchase and sale documents for Mr X’s vehicle as well as the invoices for parking charges during the relevant period.
12. The Council agrees that several permits have been issued to Mr X’s neighbours by mistake, prior to Mr X’s complaint. Any benefit derived by other people from receiving a parking permit due to a mistake by the Council is not an injustice to Mr X. There is no evidence any new permits have been issued by the Council since Mr X complained.
13. The Council has provided Mr X with a number of daily visitors passes and has provided feedback and training to the officer who gave the wrong advice. This is a partial remedy but does not fully address Mr X’s losses.

Agreed action

14. To remedy the injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within four weeks of this decision:
• Pay Mr X £1805 for the loss incurred when he sold his car and for the parking charges he incurred.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have found fault by the Council causing injustice to Mr X. I have now completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman