Summary: Mr X complains the Council discriminated against him on the grounds of his disability when it issued him with a parking penalty. We will not investigate as Mr X had the right to appeal against the penalty to an independent tribunal. Additionally, there is no indication of fault in the way the Council considered Mr X’s claim of disability discrimination.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council discriminated against him on the grounds of his disability when it issued a parking penalty to him. Mr X complains about financial loss and discrimination.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault or we cannot achieve the outcome someone seeks (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered what Mr X said in his complaint and sent him my draft decision on it for his comments. I have considered the comments Mr X made in response.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X complains the Council discriminated against him on the grounds of his disability when it issued a parking penalty to him. Mr X says he has photographs of other cars parked illegally at the location on the same day but says that only his car, the only one displaying a blue badge, was issued with a penalty. Mr X says this has happened before and feels this shows the Council is discriminating against blue badge holders.
7. Mr X paid the fine but wants a refund, an end to the discrimination and for the staff involved to be reprimanded.
8. The Council acknowledges that photographs Mr X has supplied do show other cars illegally parked at the location but it says this was not the case when the penalty was issued. It says at that time, only Mr X’s car was present. A photograph supplied by the Council does not show any other cars parked nearby. The Council considered Mr X’s claim that it had discriminated against him but dismissed it. The Council found no evidence that its officer deliberately ignored other vehicles and only issued a penalty to the one car displaying a blue badge.

Analysis

9. The parking penalty was issued under the Traffic Management Act 2004. This provides an appeal procedure for motorists to challenge penalties and it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have followed this procedure.
10. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint about discrimination but rejected it. I have seen no indication there was fault in the Council’s consideration so we cannot challenge the merits of its decision. Additionally, we cannot determine if there was a breach of equalities law as only the courts can do this.
11. We have no remit to become involved in disciplinary matters at the Council.
12. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

13. My decision is that we will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X could reasonably have appealed against the penalty and we cannot challenge the Council’s response to Mr X’s claims of being discriminated against.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman