City of York Council (21 016 172)
Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 28 Feb 2022
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to introduce a residents parking scheme which will include Mr X’s road. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council and there is insufficient injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.
The complaint
- The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision to introduce a residents parking scheme in his road. He complains about the lack of a clear policy on the subject, that it has not carried out monitoring, that it did not properly consider displacement parking or alternative schemes and about the use of Council funds for it.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide:
- there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
- any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
- any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
- we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
- further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr X, including the Council’s response to his complaint.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Following a majority vote and the consideration of other factors, the Council decided to introduce a residents parking scheme in an area which covers Mr X’s road.
- Unhappy with this decision, Mr X complained to the Council raising a variety of concerns about its actions which the Council responded to.
- While I understand Mr X may not agree with the Council’s decision, we are not an appeal body. It is not our role to question decisions a council makes if it has followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. As I have seen no evidence to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision to introduce the scheme, and because Mr X’s personal injustice is limited, we will not investigate the complaint.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council and there is insufficient injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman