Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with parking issues near his home. We have found the Council to be at fault because of delay, poor communication and complaint handling. To remedy the injustice to Mr X, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to him, review the parking situation without delay and make service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to take prompt action to address an urgent and potentially dangerous parking problem outside his property. He says the illegal, regular obstructions to his driveway and turning circle have caused significant inconvenience, stress and has potential for a serious accident to occur.
2. He has also been caused inconvenience trying to resolve this matter with the Council since February 2021.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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. As part of the investigation, I have:

• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents provided;
• discussed the issues with Mr X; and
• sent a draft decision to both the Council and Mr X and invited their comments. All comments have been considered before issuing my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. A highways authority can under the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984, make a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to meet its duty to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians) and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off the highway.
8. For parking restrictions to be enforceable by council traffic wardens, they must be part of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). This includes road markings such as double yellow lines.
9. Police can remove vehicles causing an obstruction, regardless of whether there is a TRO in place.
10. The procedures for creating a TRO are set out in the ‘the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996. The process is lengthy and includes publication of proposals, opportunity for objections and creation of the order.
11. H-bars are advisory markings with no legal standing, the Council can introduce these markings outside of a parking review.

What happened

12. Mr X has a shared driveway that exits on to a busy road. Because of its proximity to the local train station, this road is often used by commuters who park for the whole day while they are at work. Part of this road has parking restrictions enforced by double yellow lines.
13. Mr X says he encounters the following problems:

• Cars either fully or partially block his driveway.
• Cars parked on the double yellow lines, including disabled drivers, restrict the turning circle required to either access his drive or exit onto the road.
• Parked cars restrict his visibility when exiting onto the road. This creates a potentially dangerous situation and Mr X has witnessed several “near misses”.

14. Mr X says that even when he reported such incidents to the Council, it often takes several hours for an enforcement officer to arrive on site. The owners of the cars usually do not return until the end of the working day. In meantime, Mr X and his neighbours are unable to go out by car, often missing urgent appointments and work commitments.
15. In February 2021, Mr X reported these access and safety concerns to the Council. He was advised to contact Officer B. Mr X did so several times over the following months. It was not until Mr X made an official complaint in June 2021, was he contacted by Officer B the following month.
16. In response to his complaint, Officer B explained the double yellow lines had been painted incorrectly and were too short. She said this “needs to be addressed further” but would require a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). This would be a lengthy process.
17. In the meantime, Officer B suggested a white painted H-bar on the road in front of the driveway could be a temporary solution to cars blocking his driveway. Mr X agreed to this proposal. Despite sending several reminders, it took Officer B eleven weeks to reply to his acceptance. Officer B said she would ask the relevant contractor to carry out the work.
18. While grateful for this, Mr X reminded Officer X that it was only a temporary solution and he remained concerned that drivers would still park illegally. He felt obtaining the TRO should remain a priority.
19. In October 2021, Mr X made a further (stage two) complaint because of the excessive delay and the ongoing problems with parking. He provided the Council with several other possible solutions to address the problem. He was also concerned that he had been asked to pay for the H-bar when this had not been mentioned before. The Council did not reply. In January 2021, Mr X asked the Council to escalate his complaint to stage three. The Council refused to do so because it said delay in responding to a complaint was not a valid reason for moving to the next stage of its complaints procedure. Frustrated by this approach and he length of time he had already waited, Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.
20. In response to the Ombudsman’s enquiries, the Council made the following points

• It was at fault for the time taken to progress the matter.
• The incorrect length of the double yellow lines contributed to the parking problem.
• The possible correction of the double yellow lines was being dealt with as a priority.
• It would install the H-bar free of charge at the next available timeslot.
• It would consider the possibility of erecting signage to deter problem parking.

Recent events

21. In July 2022, the H-bar was partially completed. Mr X has provided a photograph showing one end was not painted. He has also provided a photo of a car parked on the edge of the white line but still partially obstructing his access. He reported this to the Council but was told a parking ticket would not be issued unless the car was parked one whole wheel length over the white line. Mr X says this is a nonsensical position to take where the driveway is so narrow. The Council suggested a wider footway crossing may be a possible solution to deter drivers from parking so close to his access and to reflect the narrowness of the drive.

Analysis

22. My role is to determine whether there has been administrative fault in the way the Council responded to Mr X’s concerns about problem parking and traffic management on the road outside his home. It is not my role to assess whether or not the parking situation requires specific action to be taken. I will address the specific areas of complaint below:

Delay

23. In response to my enquiries, the Council has accepted it took too long to progress this case, in part due to staff leaving the relevant department. Mr X first reported his concerns in February 2021. Mr X then had to wait 18 months for the partial completion of the H-bar in July 2022. In this time, the records show Mr X regularly contacted the Council requesting an update and was ignored. It is entirely understandable why he felt so frustrated. This significant delay is fault that caused Mr X an injustice that requires a remedy.

Traffic Regulation Order

24. At the time of writing this draft decision, the Council has not confirmed what, if any action has been taken to address the problem of the length of the double yellow lines. Officer B accepted they were the incorrect length in her email to Mr X in July 2021 and said a TRO would be considered to rectify this. A year later, still no action has been taken to either correct this mistake or advise Mr X why this is not possible. This is fault.
25. This Council has said this matter has been referred to an engineer. In the context of the delay and previous lack of progression in this case, I find this commitment too vague. Instead, this should be progressed without further delay to avoid any further fault. I have made recommendations below to ensure this.

H-bar

26. The Council has also accepted that Officer B incorrectly advised Mr X that she had issued an instruction to have the H-bar painted in September 2021. It is also disappointing that after such a long wait, the H-bar was not properly completed. Mr X’s recent photograph demonstrates this has made it less effective. It is reasonable to assume that had the line been painted properly, this obstruction and inconvenience and frustration to Mr X could have been avoided. This is evidence of further fault.

Complaint handling

27. Mr X first complained on 1 June 2021. He complained again in October 2021 but did not receive a response at all. His first complaint should have been responded to within three weeks, his second complaint within four weeks. The Council failed to meet these targets. As a result, Mr X was put to additional time and trouble pursuing the matter. This is fault.

Current situation

28. I understand Mr X is frustrated by the Council’s current position regarding parking enforcement. Whether a car is illegally parked and a ticket to be issued is not a matter for the Ombudsman. It is also for the Council to decide whether additional signage is appropriate.
29. However, I can see there may be some merit in the Council’s suggestion of widening the footway crossing. It is disappointing this was not suggested by Officer B at the outset.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults I have identified, I the Council has agreed to take the following action within four weeks from the date of my final decision:
1. Apologise in writing to Mr X for the faults I have identified.
2. Pay £150 to Mr X to acknowledge the time and trouble he has spent dealing with the complaint.
3. Pay Mr X £250 to acknowledge the distress and frustration caused by the Council’s failure to progress this case properly.
4. Carry out a prompt review of the parking concerns raised by Mr X and provide him with details of the action, if any, the Council intends to take. It should also provide a timeframe for any such action.
5. Ensure the H-bar is completed, if not done so already.
6. Remind its staff of its responsibilities to consider and respond properly to the complaints it receives.

Back to top

Final decision

31. I have found the Council to be at fault and the Council has agreed with my recommendations to remedy the injustice to Mr X. On this basis I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman