Surrey County Council (20 007 474)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 14 Dec 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision not to include her suggested alterations to a nearby parking bay in a review of parking in her area. We should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

  1. Mrs X complained about a Council decision not to include her request for a nearby parking bay to be shortened and access limited to residents only. She says the bay causes vehicles to be parked too close to her drive access and this can cause traffic hazards when she pulls out into the street due to poor visibility. She wants the bay to be restricted to residents use only because tradesmen’s vans cause particular reduction in visibility.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I have considered all the information which Mrs X submitted with his complaint. Mrs X has been given an opportunity to comment on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mrs X says she has had problems with obtaining a clear view of traffic when she exits her driveway since he bought her home in 2018. She asked the Council in 2020 to consider shortening a nearby parking bay and restricting its use to residents only.
  2. The Council told Mrs X that it would not change the 2020 review which had already been drawn up for Committee consideration. It did not believe there was sufficient merit to add the request and Mrs X had not obtained a 70% consensus from residents which would qualify for a proposal to be included.
  3. The Council advised Mrs X to seek the necessary consent and submit her request for the 2021 review. Requests included in the review are subject to the approval of the Council and as highway authority it has a power to decide what changes to local parking schemes and traffic management should be introduced.
  4. There is no evidence of fault in the procedure which the Council followed and it is not the Ombudsman’s role to question the merits of a decision where there is no evidence of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings