Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant cannot have a parking permit for visitors. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, complains the Council will not give her a parking permit for her visitors. She wants the Council to give her a permit or allow her to buy a car park permit for the same price as a visitor permit.

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered comments Mrs X made in reply to a draft of this decision and looked at photographs she provided.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

4. Mrs X lives in a new development. The Council granted planning permission for the development in 2017. A condition of the planning permission was that residents of the new development would be excluding from the parking permit scheme. Mrs X has an allocated parking place but complains the Council will not give her a parking permit for visitors.
5. The Council explained that the planning consent excludes residents of the new development from joining the permit scheme. It said her neighbours have access to the scheme if they are existing residents of the street and do not live in the new development. The Council said it cannot issue Mrs X with a permit as this would be contrary to the planning consent. The Council said Mrs X could buy a permit for a car park. A car park permit is £50 a year.
6. Mrs X is dissatisfied with the reply. She says she is being discriminated against and treated differently to her neighbours. She wants the Council to allow her to buy a visitor permit or to let her buy a car park permit for the same £25 fee that she would pay for a permit. She says she could not challenge the 2017 planning decision and it is unfair that her neighbours, who have smaller homes, have access to more parking.

Assessment

7. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The planning consent for the development said residents would be excluded from the parking permit scheme. The Council’s decision not to allow Mrs X to buy a visitor permit is consistent with the planning condition so there is no reason to start an investigation. In addition, the planning consent does not say that residents of the new homes will be able to buy car park permits at a reduced price.
8. Mrs X is correct to say she could not challenge the 2017 planning decision; that was part of the Council’s planning process to determine if the development should be built. It is not possible for residents to retrospectively challenge a planning decision if there is a condition they disagree with.
9. We do not act as an appeal body and we cannot intervene because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with. I cannot tell the Council it should ignore the planning condition and give Mrs X a permit. This is because I have no power to ask a council to act in a way that would breach a planning condition.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman