Summary: Mrs D says the Council failed to enforce parking contraventions outside her home. The Ombudsman has not found evidence of fault by the Council. He has completed the investigation and not upheld the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Mrs D) says the Council has failed to investigate and enforce parking contraventions outside her home. She says the problems are caused by vehicles parking up for pick ups and drops offs at a nearby school. Mrs D says the issues have been going on for some years.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have looked at events from July 2019 onwards. I explain below why I cannot consider earlier events.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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 have spoken to Mrs D and carefully considered the information she provided. I asked the Council questions and examined its response.
7. I shared my draft decision with both parties.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

8. Mrs D lives near a school. There is a single yellow line on the road outside her property. She says that in the morning and afternoon vehicles park illegally whilst dropping off and picking up pupils. There has been a large amount of contact by Mrs D with the Council. I do not list each email below, but I have seen the documents.
9. In October 2019 Mrs D reported parking issues in her road to the Council. On 18 October an Operations Manager emailed her and said the area was patrolled and it would try to carry some out some additional visits by Civil Enforcement Officers (CEOs). In early 2020 Mrs D experienced fewer parking issues due to lockdown and the covid-19 pandemic. In July she contacted the Council requesting it use the CCTV surveillance vehicle to monitor parking on her road. As soon as the school reopened parking problems recommenced with vehicles parking outside her home. She wanted the Council to enforce more vigorously and tow vehicles like London Boroughs did. On 6 July the Council responded. A CEO was attending the site that day. It said that Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) were issued as a last resort. If a driver was in the vehicle the CEOs had a duty to allow them to move before issuing a PCN. The Council did not have the same powers as London Boroughs in respect of enforcement. The next day Mrs D emailed the Council, she had seen the CEO and they did a good job talking to drivers. She hoped visits would continue. Mrs D continued to correspond with the Council.
10. On 28 July the Council told Mrs D a CEO had been to the road and dealt with any contraventions. At the end of August Mrs D asked the Council to have CEOs on site for the first few days of the new school term in the morning and afternoon. The Council replied that this was not possible. The Council had over 60 schools to cover in respect of parking issues. The site was “rostered for attention” along with a number of other schools. The Council reiterated in September that it could not provide additional patrols due to limited resources.
11. From July 2019 to early 2021 the Council’s CEOs made 72 visits to the site and issued 30 PCNs.

What should have happened

12. North Essex Parking Partnership (NEPP) deals with parking and waiting restrictions for the Council. In this statement I refer to the Council because NEPP are acting as agents of the Council. The Council divides the District into areas and allocates CEO patrols to each. CEOs patrol different sites each day
13. A resident can email a parking contravention report to the Council using the “parking inbox”. If the Council receives a parking contravention email and a CEO is in the area, they will attend the same day. However, the Council does not provide an urgent response service. Usually, the report will be logged, and a CEO asked to patrol the site when next in the area.
14. If a CEO witnesses a parking contravention outside a school, and the driver is in the vehicle, they must allow the driver an opportunity to relocate. If that offer is refused or the driver is not present the CEO can issue a PCN. The Council operates under different legislation to London Boroughs who have enhanced enforcement powers in respect of parking contraventions.
15. The Council has a Park Safe CCTV vehicle for parking enforcement. It cannot use CCTV to enforce yellow line contraventions.

Was there fault by the Council

16. Mrs D says the Council should patrol her road more often and take enforcement action. I have not found evidence of fault by the Council. It has responded to Mrs D’s reports and carried out a much higher than average number of site visits. The Council will usually patrol the area near a school once or twice a month. In this case it has made over double that number of patrols. Whilst I understand Mrs D is frustrated the Council will not attend the area more frequently, there is no duty on it to do so. The Council has correctly advised Mrs D that it has many sites to cover with finite resources. I am satisfied the Council has attended to Mrs D’s reports in line with its policies and procedures.
17. Mrs D would like the Council to use its Park Safe CCTV vehicle in her road. Given the vehicle cannot be used for yellow line contraventions the Council had the right to refuse this request. It explained to Mrs D that it cannot use CCTV to enforce the yellow line outside her home. There is no evidence of fault in this matter.
18. Mrs D also wants the Council to enforce contraventions more rigorously like London Boroughs. Again, the Council has correctly advised Mrs D that it operates under different legislation to London Boroughs. As such it does not have the same remit or enforcement options. There is no fault by the Council.
19. I appreciate Mrs D disagrees with decisions taken by the Council. However, the Ombudsman will not question the merits of those decisions in the absence of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have completed the investigation and not upheld the complaint.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

21. The Ombudsman expects a complaint to be made within 12 months of the problem arising. This means we will not look back over several years.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman