Summary: Mr B complained there was delay in installing double yellow lines near to his home and that officers failed to respond to him. He said the delay meant it took longer than it should to resolve the parking problems. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mr B. The Council will apologise and make a payment to him.

The complaint

1. I call the complainant Mr B. He complained there was delay in installing double yellow lines near to his home and that officers failed to respond to him. He said the delay meant it took longer than it should to resolve the parking problems.

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’. 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)
3. 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

4. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Mr B and spoke to him. I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Mr B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of the relevant legal framework

5. A traffic regulation order (TRO) allows councils to introduce and enforce parking restrictions. Before making a TRO the law requires the Council to publish a notice in a local newspaper. A council must also take such other steps as it may consider appropriate to ensure adequate publicity. The Council must consider any objections made and cannot make the order until the deadline for objections has passed.

What happened

6. Mr B’s property has a garage at the rear. There was parking in the area which blocked access to the garage. Mr B applied for an extension to the dropped kerb which necessitated an amendment to the TRO that was in place. He understood that would mean double yellow lines would be installed.
7. The Council’s position was that it was not the case that such a change would mean installation of double yellow lines. So the amendment was processed as just a change to the bay. When the work was done to change the bay but there were no double yellow lines Mr B complained.
8. The Council did not know how the misunderstanding had arisen but agreed to carry out a second consultation and TRO process to introduce the double yellow lines, as a priority.
9. There was then no action by the Council for two months. Mr B complained which prompted the Council to advertise the TRO amendment. The Council also responded to Mr B but the plan accompanying the response did not show the lines going as far as needed. Mr B again complained. The Council responded five weeks later. It said the consultation period ended that day and the lines would be installed within two weeks.
10. The lines were installed after four weeks. The work could not be completed because of parked cars but was finished shortly afterwards.

Analysis

11. I did not investigate how the original difference of view came about over whether the first TRO amendment should have included the provision of double yellow lines. This is because the focus of the complaint was on what happened after the works in June. There was then delay by the Council – it said it would act immediately but there was no action for over two months. There was also a failure to communicate with Mr B. There was then some further slight delay in completing the works.
12. Mr B was put to additional time and trouble in pursuing the matter and it took longer than promised for the Council to install the lines.

Agreed action

13. The Council will apologise to Mr B and pay him £100 in recognition of the impact on him. It should do so within one month of the final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

14. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mr B.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman