Summary: Mr X complained the Council had failed to charge him in line with the advertised price when he paid for parking by phone. The Council failed to ensure its parking signs contained the correct information for all charges. The Council has agreed to apologise for Mr X, make changes to the signs to ensure they are correct and improve its complaint handling.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to charge him in line with the advertised prices when he paid for parking by phone.
2. Mr X says that as a result he had to pay more for parking than he expected.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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’. 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)
4. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), 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. I have considered:
• The information provided by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him;
• The Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting information it provided; and
• Relevant law and guidance.
7. Mr X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

8. Councils can introduce controlled parking zones (CPZ) under a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). The legislation for TROs is set out in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.
9. Regulation 18 of The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 states the local authority must ensure there is signage with adequate information available to the person using the road and that these signs must be maintained and amended to avoid confusion if the order is revoked or changed.

What happened

10. Mr X parked in one of the Council’s controlled parking zones, in Staniforth, in late August 2022. He paid for his parking using the Council’s pay by phone option. He paid for one hour’s parking and two text reminders.
11. The parking signs at the location stated that Mr X would be charged £1.60 for one hour of parking. It also advised of additional charges - these were £0.30 per text reminder and a transaction charge of £0.01 for using pay by phone. Mr X was charged £2.31.
12. Mr X raised his concerns with the Council via email in late August 2022. He requested that the Council refund the 11p overpayment and erect clearer signage at the location. The Council’s response to the complaint outlined Mr X’s complaint and stated in light of the above he should complete a form available on its website to report faulty ticket machines. It also provided contact details for the parking team.
13. Mr X escalated his complaint as he was raising concerns about a faulty telephone app not a faulty ticket machine. He complained the response was not applicable to his situation. He included the parking team in his email. The Council provided the same response again from the complaints department. He did not receive a response from the parking team.
14. Mr X contacted the Council again to raise concerns that its response did not address the concern he had raised.
15. The Council uses a company to run its parking scheme. The company’s website says charges are £0.30 per text reminder and an £0.11 transaction charge.

Findings

16. As part of our investigation, we made enquiries with the Council about its signs in Staniforth. Within its response to our enquiries, the Council has accepted that the signs are incorrect and has said that an order has been raised for new signs to be fitted. The signs should show the correct transaction charge. It is fault for the Council to have signs in place with incorrect information on them.
17. Mr X has not been charged for more than he should have for his parking but says there was some confusion caused by the discrepancy in charges.
18. The Council issued both complaint responses within the timescales set out in its complaints policy. The response, though, did not explain why the complaints department were not upholding his concerns or why he needed to raise them elsewhere and how that would help him. This is fault.
19. The Council directed Mr X in its response to a website for reporting faults with parking meters. When we enquired with the Council about how signage issues could be reported it did not provide the website as an option. Directing Mr X to a website that could not address his concerns is fault.
20. Mr X also raised his concerns to the parking team by email in early September as directed in the stage one response. There is no evidence he received a response. The Council should be acknowledging and responding to emails. Its failure to do so is fault.
21. Mr X has been inconvenienced in raising his concerns to ensure that the signs provide the correct information by having to raise his concerns several times to different departments. These have not been acknowledged and he has therefore taken the time to bring his complaint to the Ombudsman.
22. Further, I note the Council’s complaints policy requires people to give an explanation as to why they are unhappy with the stage one response. Mr X explained in his escalation that the Council stage one response had not addressed his concerns that the signs were wrong. He also explained he had been charged more than the indicated price. The stage two response issued provided the same information as the stage one and did not address any of these concerns.
23. In December 2022, and in response to my draft decision, the Council provided evidence it had changed the signs in Staniforth to include the 11p cost of using the pay by phone service. I have therefore removed a recommendation to do that before issuing my final decision as I am satisfied it is already complete.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. Within four weeks of this decision the Council will:
• Apologise to Mr X for the injustice caused by the fault identified above.
25. Within two months the Council will:
• Improve its complaint handling with staff training to ensure full explanations are given in its responses and that responses address the comments raised.
26. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have completed my investigation. I found fault leading to an injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice and to prevent the recurrence of the fault.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman