Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to consider the impact on her guest house business when it introduced its digital parking permits. Miss X also says the system is not flexible or suitable for guesthouse businesses when requesting or amending online permits. She says this has caused her frustration, confusion, and anxiety as well as monetary loss. We find fault with the Council for failing to properly explain its concessions and failing to consult trade organisations about implementing digital parking. This caused an injustice to Miss X, however, we are satisfied the Council has now remedied any injustice caused. We do not find fault with the Council for the implementation or flexibility of the online digital system.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council did not consider the impact on her guest house business when it set up its digital parking permit policy.
2. Miss X also says the system is not flexible or suitable for guesthouses when seeking digital parking permits and inputting vehicle registration details for guests and overseas visitors. She says this has caused her frustration, confusion and anxiety as well as causing a monetary loss.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
5. 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)
6. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have spoken to Miss X and made enquiries of the Council. I have read the information Miss X and the Council have provided about the complaint.
8. I have invited Miss X and the Council to comment on this draft decision. I have considered their responses before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation

The Council’s Guest House Parking Permits

9. Parking Permits are only issued and stored online. Applicants must complete their details online and supply a valid email address. The Council no longer issues physical permits.
10. The guesthouse owner can change the car registration/number plate by logging into the online parking portal and updating this with new car registration details. (This applies anytime the permit passes to a new guest car).
11. The owner of a guest house can buy up to 6 permits for 3 or 12 months which vary in price.
12. Each permit allows one car/bus to park in the guest house bays within the restricted parking zone at any one time.

What Happened

13. Miss X owns a guest house in the Council’s area and bought six parking permits for distribution to her guests. Miss X says the Council recently digitalised its parking system.
14. The Council’s executive committee discussed the digitalisation of parking permits in 2019 and 2020. This continued the Council’s agreed corporate digital strategy from 2014. The Council said this ensured information was made publicly available about the proposals and allowing the public the opportunity to give their views. The online system was introduced in September 2021.
15. The Council issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for parking without a permit to a resident staying in Miss X’s guesthouse who had arrived unexpectedly and had checked in without the owners being onsite in February 2022.
16. Miss X says she appealed the PCN. She explained she had correctly recorded the car registration details online and had been under the impression from the Council that she had until 8AM the following day to do this. Miss X also says she told her guest not to worry as she believed they had until 8AM to register the car. However, she says this led to her to receiving an unfavourable online review which directly affects her business. Miss X also complained saying the Council had not consulted guesthouse owners about the change from physical to digital permits.
17. The Council refused to cancel the PCN and said it had reviewed the procedure about visitor permits but did not uphold Miss X’s complaint. It said, “the parking portal can be updated the next day by 8AM.” It also explained it had sent out letters between July and September 2021 advising customers of the change to the parking system.
18. Miss X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and continued to dispute the PCN. She remained confused about parking enforcement times, however, to prevent the fine increasing she paid the customer’s PCN.
19. Miss X remained unhappy with the Council’s response and said it failed to cancel the PCN on two occasions. She complained to us in February 2022.
20. The Council responded to Miss X in March 2022. It apologised for the confusion caused and for not communicating effectively with her about the times of enforcement. It clarified that no enforcement action would take place between 9 PM and 8 AM. The Council also agreed to cancel the PCN and refund the payment.
21. The Council cancelled the PCN and refunded Miss X in May 2022.

The Council’s response to my enquiries

22. The Council responded to my enquiries in June 2022. It said there had been no consultation about introducing the online parking system. However, it noted the public had the opportunity to present views following the committee consultation in November 2019 and April 2020. I have also seen letters the Council sent to guest houses and businesses throughout 2021 explaining the change to the digital system.
23. It said it recognised there were some early problems with the online system, and this was a cultural change for business owners. It said it had considered all points raised by Miss X. The Council recognised guests may arrive unexpectedly or late into the evening and made the concession to its parking restrictions by not enforcing parking controls between 9PM and 8AM. This allowed Miss X to input the registration details online until 8AM the following day. The Council noted it now allowed a concession to its usual enforcement rules.
24. It also said that it would:

• always consider individual or exceptional circumstances.
• monitor and consider the impact on businesses in general.
• consider the time and flexibility of annual and three month permits.
• monitor feedback from business owners and keep this under review.

25. The Council said it was for guesthouse owners to explain the online parking system to its guests to prevent parking fines.

Analysis

26. The Council adopted the policy to digitalise its parking system in 2014 and that decision is now too long ago for us to investigate. Therefore, we have concentrated on how the Council has carried out this decision since 2019.
27. The Council has recognised it did not give clear information to Miss X about the times it would seek to enforce its parking restrictions. This was fault and caused Miss X confusion and frustration when a guest was issued with a PCN (which Miss X paid) and resulted in her business receiving a negative review online. This would have been avoidable if the Council had explained its concessions to its parking restrictions clearly. However, I am satisfied the Council has remedied the injustice by apologising to Miss X and cancelling and refunding the PCN.
28. The Council accepts it did not specifically consult business owners directly in 2019 and 2020. I would have expected the Council to have told the trade associations as part of its publicity, given the digitalisation of permits is a significant cultural and procedural change. This was fault and left Miss X feeling confusion and frustration at the change in policy. However, I accept the Council did send letters explaining the change to digital parking in 2021. I am satisfied the Council having listened to and considered feedback has offered concessions on its enforcement procedures. I am also satisfied the Council has remedied any injustice caused to Miss X.
29. The Council notes have also shown it is open to considering individual and exceptional circumstances and will continue to monitor and review issues about the online permits from guesthouse and business owners. It also says it will monitor the flexibility of its three month and annual permits. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council’s implementation or flexibility of the policy.

Back to top

Final Decision

30. I have completed my investigation by finding fault with the Council for not explaining its concessions properly and failing to consult with trade organisations about the introduction of its online parking permits. This caused Miss X confusion and frustration. I do not find fault with the Council for the flexibility or implementation of its digital parking policy. I am satisfied the Council has now remedied the injustice caused to Miss X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman