Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to revoke the complainant’s business parking permit. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision to revoke his business parking permit. He says the loss of the permit has had a negative impact on his business. He wants the Council to reinstate the permit.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X held a business parking permit for about 15 years. The Council reviewed the permit because it received a report that Mr X’s vehicle was parked in a bay for most of the time. The Council asked Mr X to provide evidence that a permit is essential for the operational viability of his business. Mr X supplied some evidence but the Council decided it did not show he qualifies for a permit. The Council gave Mr X 14 days to provide more evidence. Mr X did not provide more evidence so the Council cancelled the permit. Mr X says he did not see the email asking for more evidence but the Council confirmed it was sent.
6. Mr X complained. In response the Council gave a detailed explanation of the qualifying rules for a business permit and why it had decided Mr X had not demonstrated he meets those rules. It said the Council can revoke a permit if the permit holder is not complying with the terms and conditions.
7. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. We are not an appeal body and cannot decide if Mr X is eligible for a permit – that is a decision for the Council. I can consider how the Council decided to revoke the permit and I see no suggestion of fault in the way it reached that decision. The Council considered evidence from Mr X and invited more evidence. It also explained the permit rules and why it had decided the evidence does not show Mr X meets the rules. The Council also explained how Mr X can conduct his business, including doing deliveries, without using a business permit.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman