Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to introduce parking restrictions on her road. She says the Council consulted too widely and did not consider all information. We find no fault with the Council’s actions or decision to introduce parking restrictions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to impose parking restrictions on her road, which she objected to. She complains:
• The Council consulted too widely.
• The Speakers Panel did not consider all the information provided to it and did not consider the residents’ comments.
• The Speakers Panel was not fair to residents as they were not given enough time to prepare and the Council only allowed one resident to speak at the panel.

She also complains about the confusion information provided by the Council after the proposals were agreed by the Speakers Panel.

2. Mrs X said this caused her an injustice as the restrictions limit where residents can park their cars.

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. 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)
5. 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

6. I spoke with Mrs X and considered the information she provided.
7. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
8. I sent a draft decision to Mrs X and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Traffic Regulation Orders

9. The procedure for creating a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) are set out in the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure)(England and Wales) Regulations 1996.
10. Consultation is covered under Regulation 7, which requires councils to publish a notice in a local newspaper. A council must also ‘take such other steps as it may consider appropriate’ to ensure satisfactory publicity. This may include directly telling people affected, but this is not a requirement.
11. Regulation 8 allows any person to object in writing within 21 days of the publication of the proposal. Regulation 13 requires a council to consider any objections made under Regulation 8.

Council’s controlled parking policy

12. The policy notes the Council will consider requests from residents, businesses and local councillors for a controlled parking scheme. The Council will review all request. When the Council identifies potential schemes, it will take them forward through the traffic regulation order process. If the Council does not support the scheme, it will not be forwarded for approval.
13. Once the Council identifies a scheme to take forward, it will send questionnaires to affected households to identify whether there is support for such a scheme. The Council will also ask residents about their preferred days and hours of operation. The policy notes 28 days will usually be given to respond to the questionnaire. If the resident does not return the questionnaire, it is counted as being not in support of the scheme

What happened

14. Mrs X lives on a street, Street A. In October 2019, the Council consulted residents, which included Mrs X, to identify whether there was support to introduce a controlled parking scheme.
15. The Council set out its proposal in a plan. The plan showed a proposed controlled parking zone in streets neighbouring Street A. The plan showed a proposed no waiting at any time and four hour waiting and permit holders only zone for Street A.
16. The Council explained if a small area of road within a wider road network was covered by a controlled parking scheme, this may only serve to move the parking problem a short way beyond the controlled parking scheme. The Council said this would not solve the problem so considered it better to maximise the area where possible.
17. The Council also explained it had a responsibility to the residents of the area but also had a responsibility to users of the surrounding amenities, which included the park, railway station, and school.
18. The Council said it was a matter for the Council as the highway authority to identify an area it thinks is suitable as a controlled parking zone. The Council said it did not consider Street A suitable to be a zone by itself.
19. In January 2020, the Council confirmed that following the consultation in October 2019, the results showed most residents did not support a controlled parking scheme.
20. At the end of January 2020, the Council gave notice on its proposal to introduce waiting restrictions on Street A and some neighbouring streets. The Council advertise the notice in the following ways for 28 days:
• A notice was placed in the local newspaper.
• Notices were placed in the streets within the vicinity of the proposed restrictions.
• Consultation documents were made available on the Council’s website
• Letters posted to houses directly affected by the proposed scheme.
21. Mrs X sent the Council a petition, signed by all residents of Street A, objecting to the proposed waiting restrictions. Mrs X also asked the Council for the following to be set up on Street A:
• Double yellow lines on the south side of the street, rather than the proposed double yellow on the north side.
• Residents parking.
• Street waste bins.
• 20 mile an hour speed limit signs.
• Grass verges being repaired.
• Signs for the new car park.
22. The Council produced a report which for the Speakers Panel. This was the panel which would decide whether to agree to the proposed waiting restrictions. The report outlined the objections received by the Council to the proposal to introduce the waiting restrictions.
23. The report detailed the Council received seven objections, two petitions, and one email supporting the proposal. The report outlined the objections put forward by responders. The report also noted the Council’s response to Mrs X’s petition. The Council noted:
• It had proposed the double yellow lines on the north side to provide clear visibility for residents with driveways to access and exit their property safely. The Council also said it would allow more vehicles to park on the street.
• Council said there was not enough support to introduce residents parking as only 40% of the area were supporting of controlled parking.
• It would look into replacing the street waste bins.
• It would install 20 mile per hour signs.
• It would repair the grass verges once waiting restrictions were implemented.
• It would install signs to the car park.
24. At a Speakers Panel in May 2020, the members considered the objections outlined. The panel also heard from a member of the public who spoke at the panel to represent all objectors.
25. The panel decided to implement the Council’s proposal for waiting restrictions. The waiting restrictions came into operation at the end of July 2020.

Analysis

26. The Council’s policy notes it is for the Council to identify potential controlled parking schemes following requests. The Council has explained its reasons why it did not consider Street A to be suitable for a controlled parking scheme on its own. The Council has also explained why it consulted with a wide area.
27. Therefore, the evidence shows the Council has properly considered its decision. As the Council made its decision properly, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision itself.
28. There is evidence the Council followed the correct process as outlined in the Regulations. The Council appropriately consulted by publicising its notice in a local newspaper, placing notices in the streets affected, and posting letters to houses affected by the proposed scheme.
29. There is also evidence the Council appropriately considered the objections made to it. The Council prepared a report which outlined all the objections raised and considered the objections at the Speakers Panel. Further, a representative for the objectors was given the opportunity to speak at the Speakers Panel and present the objections.
30. Therefore, the evidence does not support Mrs X’s view that the Speakers Panel did not consider all the information provided or the residents’ comments. As the evidence shows the Panel properly considered all available information before it made its decision, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision itself. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council.
31. Mrs X says the Speakers Panel was not fair to residents as they were not given enough time to prepare and the Council only allowed one resident to speak at the Speakers Panel.
32. It is for the Council to decide how to run its panels. Legislation and guidance do not set out how the Council must consider objections, only that the Council must consider the objections. I am satisfied the Council did consider the objections.
33. Therefore, I cannot find fault with the Council’s decision to only allow one resident to speak at the Panel as it was a decision the Council was entitled to make.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I find no fault with the Council’s actions or decision to introduce parking restrictions. Therefore, I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman